Will USCCA defend this case?

So in a state where signage law is enforced, USCCA would cover the self defense aspect, but would still let the guy be found guilty on criminal trespassing for violating a gun free zone?


The bottom line there is, don’t carry where it is illegal unless you are willing to face those consequences of carrying where illegal.



Fair opinion. I’m not necessarily interested, legally speaking, in what is right and wrong. I want to know how USCCA coverage would treat this scenario.

The ignore sign or follow sign debate can get tossed into the 9 vs 45, open vs conceal carry conversation lol.


Am I wrong for thinking that the “use of a firearm for self-defense” and “carrying a firearm in a gun-free zone” are two different things?

I can’t speak for USCCA, but it seems like you could get assistance with your self-defense case and still get stuck with a charge for carrying in a prohibited place. The type of charge would depend on your state law and local prosecutor. That’s probably not what’s going through your mind when you realize there’s an active shooter at your mall, though.


You are not wrong. They are different things.

That needs to be what goes through your mind before you enter the mall. Know your state laws and if signs carry weight of law, look for them.

Personally I try very hard to avoid as many places as possible that post signs, even though signs do not carry weight of law in my states. I’d really be avoiding those places if signs did carry weight of law.


I’m still waiting for a USCCA employee to finish that statement they deleted earlier. That final sentence from the screenshot could easily end in “you are not in legal standing to possess a firearm in a gun free zone therefore your insurance is invalid”

So, if it helps, you may scroll back through this thread from the beginning and read my responses.

I am switching my user tag for the moment, I do work for Delta Defense, the official service provider of the USCCA. I just don’t leave that up there all the time because I generally like to post as just another member (I was a member for years before even knowing about Delta Defense the company or seeking employment)

I think most of the regulars already know this, but you wouldn’t have. :slight_smile:


I was curious how you knew the terms of the agreement so well lol. So are you able to finish his sentence then? I would really appreciate the full original statement to be reposted, and if there is a correction needed, have it explained as to why. This obviously seems like a judgement call which is why I know it’s hard to give a concrete answer on.

I’d rather have my legal team fight for me and not act as a pretrial jury of “if I’m worthy”

The Self-Defense Liability Insurance goes into effect when there is a self-defense incident that happens. It is stated in the agreement that you have to be able to legally possess the weapon used at the time of the incident. With Ohio being a state that enforces signs that prohibit firearms in a particular establishment, you would not be in a place where you can legally possess said firearm. It would also not qualify, seeing as though you are not involved in a self-defense incident.
With that being said, Ohio could choose to not press any charges on the fact that you were carrying that firearm in that gun-free establishment, considering the actions that may be taken to protect yourself and others. Each scenario is looked at on a case-by-case basis though.
That is why the USCCA seeks to train, not only in self-defensive firearms use but also in knowing the current gun laws in the United States so that if an incident were to occur, you will have followed the laws and kept yourself innocent.


In my hillbilly opinion it’s possessed legally.

So does walking in the mall with prohibited signs in Indiana make possession illegal?
Does walking into the mall with prohibited signs in Ohio make possession illegal?

Sounds like word games to weasel out of coverage?

1 Like

So if you had a client in Ohio who you were representing in a self-defense case where he was in a gun free zone, you would argue that his self defense was justified. However when the prosecutor brings up how he should have never been there to begin with your response would be “I totally agree”…

That is not what I am saying, at all. As I stated, each scenario is looked at on a case-by-case basis though. As I am not an attorney, I would definitely suggest reaching out to a local attorney who is familiar with the current gun laws, for a more direct answer on that specific scenario in your specific state.

1 Like

If you violate a carry law and illegally possess a firearm, you might possibly end up charged and possibly end up convicted for doing so.

You might also lawfully defend yourself using that firearm.

These do not appear to be mutually exclusive (at least relating to the USCCA membership benefits, check your state laws for more) although I also am not an attorney and this is definitely not legal advice of any type

1 Like

So you’re magazine is within the capacity allowed for the state. You bought the firearm and passed the background check and the shop took your money and then handed you the firearm. You are legally in possession now.

So what situations does USCCA exclude ?

1 Like

Ok since that question would be better suited for an attorney, how would the bills get paid in the event of a self-defense inside a gun free zone? Would you only pay an attorney inside your network the fees to defend the self-defense part of the case? Would you pay total fees of the case and if my attorney inside your network wanted to clear the charge of violating signage law?

I’m asking questions this directly not to make anyone look a certain way. You have cleared up the “strictly gun free zone” violation question perfectly. If that’s the policy, that’s fair, this is self defense insurance after all.


In essence, if you are carrying in a place that doesn’t legally allow you to carry or a worthless paper sign says you can’t and you’re concerned about it.

By all means allow active shooter to remain active!

Just remember to duck, avoid, escape, no muss no fuss, no lawyers, no money expended, no judgments! Oh yeah, no living with yourself!

Do we have to wait until the “active shooter” aims his weapon at us to be legal self defense?

Feeling lucky, gotta ask yourself one question, is it easier to ask forgiveness, than to get permission?
I’m thinking in todays criminal, Wild West environment, there are too many questions! Hesitation kills!

Can we live with ourselves after saving several innocent lives or do we apply for the Uvalde Membership?
Tier 1- Shame
Tier 2- Still employed
Tier 3- Woulda, coulda, shoulda

Sounds like, don’t ever attempt to be in a gun free zone, mall, coffee house or any place on earth that allows active shooters to be free to apply their craft!
When people want to be safe, someday in the distant future they will ask!


I try my hardest not to be. They don’t get my money!

But now my father doesn’t drive and he has to get to doctor appointments. What would you do then??

1 Like

Guess we have to admit we’re living in Brandons war zone!

So if I’m right, we are not covered in times of war or insurrection!
Faith, family and firearms! Give me liberty or give me death! Don’t tread on me! I don’t recall Patrick Henry having the need for coverage, let alone a lawyer, everyone had his back! In our country you used to be able to count on the guy to your left and your right!

I have my wife’s back and she has mine, I don’t see to many lawyers that would want to pal around with me unarmed in gun free zones!
I’ll be hiding behind him when the shots ring out, I will surely have his back, trust me!


What if, what if, what if…Our entire philosophy of self-defense by means of deadly force is in itself a “what if” exception to existing laws concerning homicide/manslaughter, etc.

In the proposed scenario, knowingly and deliberately violating criminally enforceable “no weapons” signage IS a criminal act, in and of itself, and is entirely separate from any act of self-defense. That being the case, I wouldn’t be surprised if Delta Defense declined coverage.

Let me throw another monkey in the wrench and change the scenario slightly: You are in a jurisdiction with criminally enforceable “No Weapons Allowed” signage. You are OUTSIDE a properly posted business establishment and have no intention of going inside. As you stand in their parking lot (answering texts?) you hear gunfire from inside the building. You run in, ignoring the signs, and use your legally possessed (in the parking lot) weapon successfully to stop an armed robbery or mass shooting. Now, here’s the question: In the event that you are charged in some way for the shooting by a zealous prosecutor, would Delta Defense accept the case for coverage? Even if your use of deadly force was entirely within the law, you are still technically guilty of criminal possession of a firearm, which we know is a disqualifier. Do the exigent circumstances count for anything, or is it a “letter of the law” situation?

Curious minds want to know.


This aspect of uscca membership is about an act of self defense.

I don’t know how more plainly this can be stated.

There are conditions and exclusions, read the policy I referenced above on how to find. Call if you have questions.

Breaking a law to carry where prohibited does not seem to be defined by the policy purchased by the uscca as a lawful act of self defense

It’s not blanket legal fees for any and all gun related laws you might break

Editing this post to add: As I look back at the conversation, I realize the “I don’t know how more plainly this can be stated” may come across more bluntly or abrasively than intended. I’m leaving it up because it’s what I posted yesterday, but just want to say, looking back, I’d like to apologize for it reading a bit crass. I think this is a great question/series of questions and great conversations. Never avoid asking the questions that come to mind, and never avoid asking again or in different ways until you get to a point where you feel you comprehend the answer.