Victim in YouTube Mall Prank Shooting

He said he called USCCA after the shooting. Curious to see if USCCA covered him???..I see had a public defender so I’m assuming they did because of the charges. Although the jury acquitted him, he is still facing other charges that is in the appeals process.

4 Likes

Interesting :thinking: curious as to how this proceeds.

3 Likes

USCCA will not speak on this as they try to keep everything confidential. Couldn’t even go back towards where they take those calls during the HQ tour because of how serious they treat our emergency legal response calls.

3 Likes

This is why I carry pepper spray. Non lethal options are always good. Not commenting on what I think should or should not happen.

3 Likes

The jury essentially found Colie not guilty of shooting Cook, but guilty of unlawfully firing a gun in an occupied building.

but it is clearly evident that he WAS a member of USCCA by court records as he called them immediately after the shooting (was a member since March of this year and had them on speed dial)

AND NOW HE HAS A PUBLIC DEFENDER representing him NOT USCCA…this could be damaging for USCCA if they dropped him in my opinion.

5 Likes

Closely following this case.

Not sure how it works in the case of a mass shooter.
Just curl in a fetal position?

6 Likes

I think when it comes to a prankster, I’ll settle for a well placed kick to the nuts, and an uppercut of bear spray. I didn’t see a reason for executing deadly force, maiming and mutilating, ok!
The only reason this guys in jail is because he was making an honest living. Had he been a house less, illegal drug addicted psycho, they would have given him the keys to the city!

6 Likes

Was anyone asking???

2 Likes

Think about the training videos and materials USCCA gave you. If they were to make a video on this incident, what would their advice or conversation be about while discussing about this particular scenario? What do you think Tom Grieve would say?

2 Likes

Again my question: is it just mis-phrasing to say the USCCA won’t cover said person or the insurer? In either case why does the USCCA or the insurer get to decide who is covering? To me it sounds like it’s all about money. As in we don’t want to spend too much. Shouldn’t we be covered regardless as if we are paying out of our own pockets because we are in a round about way.

The court room is where guilt and innocence is decided, not the board room!

3 Likes

There has to be some kind of process in place that avoids coverage for absolutely anyone, doing anything, anywhere, any time. So far as I can tell, every single product/membership/whatever of this type, has those. I highly doubt there is anybody (and I’ve looked) that will pay no matter what. I know what to look for and have looked into all of them and have yet to find one that is blanket guarantee. If anybody knows of what that is, please post it so we can take a look.

I’m sure we can all agree that if a person is on camera walking up to a child and drop kicking them in the head and walking away, nobody will (or should) pay for their bail and criminal defense just because they said the ‘magic words’ of “I acted in self defense”.

So, there is going to be something, from everyone and everything, where a “coverage determination” or payment determination or eligibility or whatever, is made, prior to a guilty/not guilty criminal court verdict.

We also don’t know if, in this case, anybody was or was not covered

2 Likes

the only guarantee i know of is called “having your own lawyer on paid retainer” lol

Also my understanding is that the way a retainer works you still may have to pay them more for an actual full fledged case. But I’ve never actually done a retainer. And even then, I wonder, what if you leave the area/state in which they are able to practice law and have something/charges/lawsuit somewhere else?

Doesnt matter what he would say. If coverage was denied even on not guilty verdict (well, partially guilty, I wonder if he also violated noise ordinance and committed littering offense), you have to make own conclusions.

Try looking into the Attorneys On Retainer program. I did my research on USCCA, CCW Safe, US LawShield, ACDLN, etc and will probably go with them soon and drop my USCCA membership.

3 Likes

I have. I stand by my previous statement.

Something to consider for anybody you look at…what if it’s a felony charge? What if it’s a misdemeanor charge? Keeping mind a misdemeanor charge/conviction could be a pretty big deal.

Another thing to consider is civil liability, when you make your comparisons. You might also want to look for things with the word frivolous

There are of course many other aspects to compare as well, think of everything you can to look and ask for of everyone. Exclusions, coverage territory, limits, bail bond, criminal, civil, liability, and more

3 Likes

If I would do that, I’d probably do both USCCA and attorneys on retainer.

Yes. I did the research and either spoke to and/or chatted w/ all the reps from each AND read the contracts. It was AOR #1, ACDLN #2 mainly because these weren’t insurance-backed products. There is no perfect plan out there, but these appear to be the ones that offer the best coverage and least amount of restrictions.

Ah so what USCCA says does not matter when talking about potential scenarios and is unrelated to the insurance program/policy?

Ya real smart.

Train, educate, and insure.

They all go hand in hand. USCCA gives you the training you need and the education, why would you think the insurance is unrelated to what they’re training you to do?

If they made a video I would be 100% sure they would lean far towards do not shoot this man.

OMG. LMAO that’s so cold! :joy:

3 Likes