Will USCCA defend this case?

Okay. So you own a firearm that’s legal to possess in your state. Then you go to a location that prohibits carrying. And now “the actor was not lawfully in possession of the weapon”?

So is the firearm confiscated? Are you never allowed to possess a firearm again? Or are you good to go if you leave with your firearm from the prohibited location?

Too many variables to even attempt to answer that.

Check the laws of the jurisdiction you are asking about, look up the precise law that possession of that firearm would be violating, and see what the possible punishments for a conviction are.

In my state of WI it would be a forfeiture of my CC license.

Yes. Whoever enters or remains in any of the following areas once notified not to enter or remain while carrying a firearm is subject to a Class B forfeiture:

Look up your state.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/ccw_reciprocity_map/tn-gun-laws/

I genuinely need this broken down big bird to Barney style.

1 Like

Ok so outside the “USCCA does not defend cases, delta defense does” semantics, the answer is no. I understand USCCA/delta defense is not a company like FPC in it’s mission, however USCCA/delta defense should take a look at it’s policy here. This seems unclear at best, and unfair to their customers at worst.

If by “the answer is no”, you are referring to funding for legal defense to charges for violating a carry law and possessing a firearm where illegal, you are correct. Acts of self defense potentially trigger coverage, breaking gun laws not so much

Speaking of, one of my favorite things is the free availability to all of the USCCA Reciprocity Map, to help folks navigate the absolute minefield of gun laws out there.

uscca.com/laws

^Is how I tell people to easily find it

Edit to add: But I do like that you are seeking clarification until you get a complete understanding (as complete as possible for hypotheticals determined by a third party). No reason not to ask when you have questions. :slight_smile:

@David1371
No, neither USCCA nor Delta Defense defend court cases. The insurance company, Universal Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, is responsible for determining if there was an “occurrence”, as defined in the insurance policy, that provides coverage for the claimed incident and then, if there is an “occurrence”, whether there are any exclusions that would negate coverage under the policy. If there is coverage that is not excluded, the insurer provides the coverage, as defined in the policy, and pays an attorney to represent them.
In Ohio, possession of a firearm on a properly identified “gun free zone” is an “illegal act.” Illegal acts are specifically excluded in the insurance policy.
@Barry54
The answer to you question is very location specific. For instance, in Kentucky, there are locations where deadly weapons are prohibited by law and there are locations where the person who controls the property prohibit deadly weapons. In the first instance, it is a criminal trespass and may also violate other laws, it is an illegal act and unlawful possession. In the latter, it is a criminal trespass if you are asked to leave and do not leave. If you are not asked to leave, there is no illegal act or unlawful possession.
But, as I said, this is all dependent on the applicable laws of the jurisdiction where this occurs.

2 Likes

It’s legal in Indiana, and illegal in Ohio. Different laws.
How it’s interpreted is up to the prosecutor.

I don’t think it’s fair to ask USCCA to make exceptions for state laws. Those arguments are more appropriately directed at state legislators.

One issue I have with if it is a criminal act to carry in a GFZ and then you are not covered, is what if you were not aware that you were in a GFZ? It just does not seem right that legally you are allowed to defend yourself, but step beyond a threshold, you now legally cannot defend your life with one of the more effective tools, and if you do, your coverage is void and you are on your own.

It would make sense if the coverage is void if you are a prohibited person that legally is not “allowed” to possess a firearm, but then you would not likely be getting coverage for a self-defense event.

I rarely notice no guns allowed signs. There are usually so many merchandise signs, etc., on the windows and doors, I do not pay any attention to all that crap. I know that schools, post offices (edit: and PO parking lots, yes I am aware of that, I was just saving typing), and courts are GFZs, so I know not to carry in those places. Though in Virginia no gun signs do not have the weight of law, so it does not really matter. The criminals surely do not obey those signs, so the signs only make us easier targets, for the one’s that notice and give credence to them.

1 Like

I don’t believe that is necessarily how it works.

Possession of a weapon in violation of federal law is an exclusion. Possession of a weapon in violation of state law does not necessarily in and of itself exclude potential coverage. So for this particular exclusion it depends on whether the location is off limits by state law, or federal law (as a reminder, post offices, even the parking lot, are federally off limits)

Please call the number on the back of your membership card, or chat in anytime 24/7 (the chat in the bottom right corner of the member dashboard is real live employees) if you’d like additional clarification. :slight_smile:

Edit to add, for complete clarity, though I realize we have already established it:

*Any act of self-defense is unique to the specific facts and circumstances that surround it. No two acts of self-defense are alike, and as such, each situation needs to be evaluated individually. Coverage and benefits will be determined by the insurer (Universal Fire and Casualty Insurance Company) in accordance with the terms, conditions, and exclusions of the insurance policy.

1 Like

There you have it. Your discretion but I belong here in case I have to use my gun not break posted rules. I wouldn’t shop in Ohio where signs are posted like that. I can’t carry into my local courthouse or the state capital building. I don’t like it but I obey their ridiculous rules. If I decide to break that rule and as result I am arrested that’s on me. Not because I used my gun to defend myself or another.

5 Likes

The way the world is right now the active shooter has more rights than the legally armed citizen. The legally armed citizen that stops the carnage is always Judged and scrutinized. It’s getting to where our hands are tied. Imagine having to think twice about taking down an active shooter with your legally possessed firearm because you’re not sure if you are in a gun free zone or you cannot have your firearm in that particular place. You can always have that Monday morning prosecutor who will look at that and take advantage and prosecute you because even though you stop the carnage you couldn’t have your gun there. If I can’t carry in a certain establishment I will not give them my business. My advice is not to enter establishments that do not allow you to carry. If they are not shooting at you escaping and evading would be your best bet.

4 Likes

That is true. If you carry where illegal you absolutely risk being charged with carrying where illegal

1 Like

Great post friend. Makes me pause before going to those larger social gatherings where the written law does not allow CCW carry. I sometimes just won’t go; Also I don’t wanna be a “fish in a barrel”. No thank you.

2 Likes

My sentiment is, USCAA will do everything they can to not cover your case, regardless of what happens to you. It’s like car insurance companies, it’s about the bottom line, and denying as many claims as they can and minimizing the payouts.

Looking more at their disclosures and policies, Section I right away says if you’re charged with a crime, there’s no coverage. Not convicted, charged. So, you have a case of self defense where someone breaks into your home, and you defend yourself, and the DA wants to make an example that you used excessive force, or some other charge, good luck getting USCCA to cover from what I understand. It just seems odd, because I bought the Platinum and thought it would cover most cases that weren’t criminal such as Murder 1. But, I guess that’s why there’s always those loopholes, because they know vast majority of their base won’t really need their services, but they can profit by denying as many claims as they can with the loose guidelines.

Would you mind quoting where it says that?

Blockquote
Section 1 - Coverage A Claims Expenses and Damages
Item#2 Subsection B --Exclusions – Criminal Acts: This policy does not apply to, and provides no insurance for: "Any criminal act by an "insured,’ including any injury or damage caused by or during any criminal act of any “injured.”

Disclaimer: I received this information, quoted above, from another lawyer and their posts online. I did not copy and paste this from USCCA policy. The lawyer made explicit that USCCA wouldn’t cover you in the event you were charged. That’s why I’m just looking for clarification and thought I’d ask questions…

1 Like

I am noticing that the word charge, or a variation thereof, does not appear in that.

Being charged with a crime as a result of an “occurrence” does not in itself exclude potential coverage.

2 Likes

Sooo… your jumping from post to post spreading false information? :thinking:

2 Likes

No, I’m asking questions from information I found…and as a current member. I’d prefer to keep the membership, but not if their are other more reliable options out there. Take from it what you want, or don’t answer the legitimate questions asked. Doesn’t matter to me.