Attorneys on Retainer - Self-Protection Plan - National Announcement

Many years ago at work we had one of the guys I worked with talking about prepaid legal. I dont remember it specifically being for self defense. But it would have been general purposes. As I recall it didnt impress me. :us:

1 Like

Those types of pre-paid legal assistance are usually for simple things like writing wills, estates, powers of attorney, etc. Mostly for things that you don’t need to retain a lawyer for, but will get charged a la carte pricing for by any attorney. Some plans may cover simple law violations like traffic tickets or very simple criminal issues, but I would not depend on them for a self-defense related incident.


Yes thats it looked like to me


These guys look to be criminal defense lawyers, whats the difference between having them vs just having USCCA with thousands of lawyers to pick from?


I didn’t realize their turn around was coming this quick, I thought it was just talk for the time being.

taking a look at their plan to compare to my USCCA now.

USCCA also protects you with regard to civil suits; USCCA (depending on your policy level) provides monetary compensation for every day you cannot work due to court proceedings; and much more than simply hiring an attorney will provide.


The same self defense liability policy is actually included with all three levels of USCCA membership. Here is that info:
USCCA members are additional insureds on a self-defense liability insurance policy with a $2 million annual liability insurance limit, applicable to compensatory damages, and “No Limit” on defense expenses incurred in the defense of a civil or criminal proceeding or investigation (paid in addition to the limit of liability for covered occurrences).

There are also per claim limits of up to $100,000 available for bail bond expenses.

There is a $20,000 Incidental Expenses limit which is the most the insurer will pay per claim for the costs to clean or restore the “residence premises” of the “insured” as a result of an “occurrence” or the cost to replace a firearm, up to its manufacturer’s suggested retail price, if that firearm has been confiscated as a result of an “occurrence.”

  • Included in the Incidental Expense limit will be up to a $5,000 limit for “Additional Living Expenses” which include
    • Rent for other fees incurred for temporary living quarters while your primary residence is unlivable due to an “occurrence”.
    • Cost of meals up to $25 per day per family member, in the case the primary residence is unlivable because of an “occurrence”.
    • Additional cost for fuel due to increased travel distance if the primary residence is unlivable because of an “occurrence”.
    • Temporary storage costs you incur to protect your personal property or board your pets while your primary residence is unlivable due to an “occurrence”

I have, on 2 separate occasions, left the USCCA. Due to me having additional insurance policies. I returned both times because the USCCA became a better product. Make of that what you will. I believe the USCCA is the best membership program and that’s why I have left it and then ultimately returned.

If the USCCA ever became less than it was I would find who I felt was better. So I am not a fanboi who blindly offers their loyalty. I am a former Forensic Accountant and I use that analytical, and impartial ability to dissect my decisions.

That may sound cold, but I am only interested in who ever offers the best protection for myself and my family.


Interesting, I just stumbled on LOR, and
Now assuming what Marc Victor is saying is true at face value, then he is making valid criticisms of USCCA

He pretty much made clear that instead of being full exceptions as to what is not covered, he is pretty much saying just about anything is covered.
I have been a USCCA member over a year now, and have had concerns. And here Marc seems to address them with his plan up front.

There was a prominent Youtuber, Heavy Duty Country changed from USSCA to LOR. In a video he posted in late September of 2023

So now of course my head is spinning Marc is saying oh… USCCA, CCWSAFE, or FLD will exclude you for these reasons, We will not. They seem to be saying you are paying 35 per month to be their client on retainer, and they are not insurance. But even still. If he takes cases and incurs loss either he has deep pockets or he has insurance or a reinsurer.

What heavy duty country said is wrong. Short version, there is a difference between being charged and being convicted.

I strongly suggest looking hard a every option, and ask questions like “who decides if my act will be covered”? What are the exclusions? Can it be a misdemeanor or a felony? For a covered act, what is paid for/provided? Criminal, civil, liability, bail bond expense? What is the coverage territory? Is there an attorney list I can view for the entirety of the coverage territory? Etc


I did some research on what USCCA did to Kayla Giles…it appears that even though the Criminal defense attorney hired by USCCA to defend Kayla Giles strongly felt (through video evidence at Walmart parking lot) that there was a self-defense case (USCCA even sent the initial $50k to start legal defense services, they stopped payment and decided not to cover her. I think the point here is, USCCA made the decision to deny coverage even after her defense attorney said there was arguable self-defense.

Andrew Branca’s video:

Attorneys for Freedom’s:

It looks like AOR is in the same playing field as where they are membership groups that are not tied to any insurance-backed companies. Only difference is that AOR is backed by a law firm (Attorneys for Freedom) so there is no middle man. You deal directly with the firm. With ACLDN, they still have to set you up with an Attorney (i think)

It was when she was charged with obstruction of justice and told the officer she shot her husband because he called her a bitch when they denied coverage.

I would say AOR is much better. AOR will come into play even if your drunk, some place you should not have a gun, if you shouldn’t have a gun. If your coked out of your mind. They will cover you. As long as you can show an honest belief you needed to act in self defense. That’s the beauty of not being insurance.

1 Like

For what it’s worth, as a USCCA member, there is no exclusion for being drunk (even though it’s a bad idea), and no exclusion for carrying a gun where you shouldn’t (provided it’s a state law you are violating to have the gun and not a federal violation)

Will they ‘cover you’ even if you are only charged with a misdemeanor? Keeping in mind a misdemeanor charge could be a kind of big deal to you

ALSO - DOES ANYONE KNOW ANY NEWS ON THE ALAN COLIE AND USCCA? He had USCCA, but after reading some articles, he had a public defender? That only implies that USCCA dropped him?

According to my friend that is a criminal defense attorney, “Most criminal charges arising from gun-related incidents will be charged as felony offenses.” Looking at the Attorneys Freedom agreement, they do cover misdemeanors if they are charged with a self-defense-related felony.

So if you are, say, charged with a misdemeanor…and not charged with a felony…?

What if your self defense situation was not with a firearm? (you should have more options for self defense than a gun or nothing…and most attacks do not rise to the level of lethal force…)

1 Like

Ok, good point. If it’s just a misdemeanor charge then no. If it becomes a felony or a felony is attached then yes. I’ve watched all their videos. They are amusing. They have 3 rules. It must have happened after you became a member. Must be a felony charge, and there has to be a reasonable belief of self defense. Basically they will cover you where exceptions in the others will not. I have AOR in addition to my other plan. I personally was not a fan of Marc Victor initially. I watched his videos and it’s fine for him to point out exclusions. I noticed people may not like that he does that, but you can’t be blinded by emotional loyalty to a brand.

1 Like

Nothing emotional about him providing incorrect information and putting fake news out, his understanding of exclusions is simply incorrect.

Be sure to read all of the verbiage while you are doing that due diligence.