USCCA Debunked?

I had not until you asked the question; having previously evaluated Victor’s advice in the linked ASP Extra videos, I had no reason to watch it. However, I have now watched it.

I am just giving you an opinoni based on what knowledge I have and some basic logic.

First, remember that in the world of lawyers and court cases, decisions revolve around nuanced and detailed interpretation of words and phrases in the laws, in relevant appeals court rulings, and in the context of the specific case (thus the comment from a now-disbarred lawyer who famously ,in a deposition, actually said, “It depends on what the meaning of IS is.”).

My first take-away is that the quoted USCCA attorney rep and the two attorneys here are playing games with the language about whether crime has been committed. The only determination of a crime comes from a conviction in a court. Victor and his law partner repeatedly claim that a USCCA member will be abandoned by USCCA if someone at the insurance company determines a crime has been committed. The whole purpose of USCCA’s post-incident support is to provide services, including legal representation costs, of a member ACCUSED of a crime.

Will USCCA withdraw from supporting a member after conviction n a trial court? I don’t know, but if the law firm sees it as appropriate to appeal that conviction, I would expect support to continue as long as the appeals process is deemed appropriate. Someone from Delta Defense would have to explain the appeals process for USCCA members.

My other observation is that Victor, in particular, plays word games in teh final section of the discussion. The USCCA rep pointed out that there are other aspects of member support beyond paying for lawyers, such as obtaining bail. Victor claims now to know what he was defending… Yeah, right. Do AoR members get bail support? I don’t know; ask Victor.

In fact, the various post-incident programs show options for a lot of different services. One comparison article in Gun Digest lists

Other Areas Of Concealed Carry Coverage

In many cases, CCW policies go well beyond legal expenses and cover some other aspects you might not have considered, but you’ll possibly be on the hook for:

  • Crime Scene Clean Up
  • Negligent Discharge
  • Spouse And Family Self-Defense
  • Property Damage
  • Firearms Replacement
  • Work Loss Coverage
  • Personal Use Of Firearm (non-defensive)

I think the conversation becomes circular at some point. The best example I can put is the following:

If you were doing something that was already “wrong/illegal” before you got into your self-defense situation, then USCCA is going to probably evaluate that they cannot/will not cover you.

For example, if you are a prohibited possessor, and get into a self-defense situation. If you are carrying in a place where legally you cannot, and get into a self-defense situation. If you are the instigator of the situation. In the case where the circumstances seem to be premeditated, etc. There’s probably hundreds of these situations. Unfortunately, it is up to US to be the sane, reasonable and measured ones in these situations. The bad guys don’t worry about any of this, but we MUST.

Like any other insurance (home, car, etc.) there are circumstances where your insurance company is going to refuse to cover you. Drunk driving, negligence, wreckless driving accidents etc.


So on this, it depends.

One of the exclusions is possession of a weapon in violation of federal law. So if you are a federally prohibited person in possession of a firearm illegally under federal law, that’s a no to coverage.

But carrying in an off limits location is generally a state law, and violation of a state conceal carry law or off limits location is itself not an exclusion for a lawful act of self defense not otherwise excluded

Just to go off those two examples you touched on. Many, many variables at play of course


What I have discovered from talking with my USCCA Representative is that if I am legally in the wrong, then no coverage will apply. Make sure that you are not doing something that is legally wrong. This will also be determined by the court in your case. If you are found guilty of committing a crime, then of course coverage will be revoked.

There are standards for Self Defense. Reasonableness is the most important. If you can meet the Reasonableness standard, then you have nothing to worry about.

To claim that you have acted in Self-Defense, you must meet these standards:

First, with exceptions, the defendant must prove that he or she was confronted with an unprovoked attack.
Second, the defendant must prove that the threat of injury or death was imminent.
Third, the defendant must prove that the degree of force used in self -defense was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.



Thanks for sharing.

1 Like

Let me net this out. Unless you are intent on committing a crime and disguise it as Self Defense you should be fine. The USCCA is not in the business of deciding innocence of guilty. They have a benefit that will give you the best legal defense money can buy no questions asked. If you acted within the law, you could not ask for anything better than that.

My favorite attorney was asked during one of my classes, what is the best defense I can have in court. His answer was “The best money can buy. Ask OJ.”


Daniel It’s simple then…

Two factors to make this happen (in your favor):

Throw away weapon
No wintnesses

Problem solved. Your Welcome

No, they are in the business of collecting premiums. You are right, however, about them not being in the business of paying claims. Too many people think that is their business. That is a cost of doing business to the insurance company. Every dime they can save on paying a claim goes to the bottom line. They like to portray themselves to the buying public that they are in the business of paying claims but that is Biden telling you his sone was killed in Iraq.


The USCCA is a package of both insurance for legal, and insurance in the court of public opinion. In today’s climate, the court of public opinion may be the greater value. How does the court of public opinion work? So since the USCCA is 600k strong, you already have a head start on making your case. If you don’t understand these principles then you’ve not been following current events.

Everyone should be open to anyone cracking open the legal contract to opine on it, simply because contracts get complicated. But, if someone spots a crack in the “legal” insurance, that should be bubbled up to the USCCA chief.


For insurance coverage and training, USCCA wins hands down. I don’t think there is much controversy about this. Other companies are just trying to draw members.


Just follow the training the USCCA provides.

It’ll give you the best legal set up.


You can have all the best training in the world but what if the company does not want to back you in the event of a self-defense shooting? An example I have been looking into is the Kayla Giles case. There are many moving factors with it, but what it appears to be is that the USCCA didn’t accept her case due to them making the decision that it wasnt a good self defense case.


You didn’t look to hard, that’s for sure. You are citing a case against the woman that bought a membership because she was PLANNING to murder her husband? There is NO way you can fit that into a self defense incident. Again this is like setting your house on fire and expect the Insurance Company to build you a new one!!!

She just got convicted to 20 years on Second Degree murder and has a stack of other charges piled on her.

Come on folks… Do your homework.


Me thinks he is being intentionally dense. :thinking:


I agree.


And once again, the USCCA did not turn anyone down. The insurance is a group benefit and it’s a policy the USCCA buys for all the members. The INSURANCE Company makes determinations, and from what I’ve personally seen they are exceptionally good at paying.


At one point the USCCA did think this was a good self-defense case otherwise they wouldn’t have paid out 50k. But then what are your thoughts on the client/attorney privilege and the tripartite relationships (the attorney, insurance company and client) & ethics that could be in question?

They stood behind her till the facts came out. I suggest that if you are planning a murder, have a better plan than hers. Her federal suit against USCCA was dismissed with prejudice.



what are your thoughts on the client/attorney privilege and the tripartite relationships (the attorney, insurance company and client) & ethics that could be in question?