Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.
The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.
The insurance analogy was good, but let's say instead of housing insurance is medical insurance. Just because you pay for the medical insurance does not mean you will get the best doctor, you will get the doctor they recommend. Is it a bargain for $200 per year to have a legal service? of course it is. Would it be a great lawyer they recommend? Only you will know when the case ends. Would you bet your life (behind bars) on it? I wouldn't. I would research the best attorney that my money could buy and if you find that said atty. retainer's fee is $30K I'm pretty confident that they will take installments and not touch your case until their fee is paid. A much better scenario in my opinion where you have complete control on who you would want to represent you than what a legal service recommends.
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.
The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.
The insurance analogy was good, but let's say instead of housing insurance is medical insurance. Just because you pay for the medical insurance does not mean you will get the best doctor, you will get the doctor they recommend. Is it a bargain for $200 per year to have a legal service? of course it is. Would it be a great lawyer they recommend? Only you will know when the case ends. Would you bet your life (behind bars) on it? I wouldn't. I would research the best attorney that my money could buy and if you find that said atty. retainer's fee is $30K I'm pretty confident that they will take installments and not touch your case until their fee is paid. A much better scenario in my opinion where you have complete control on who you would want to represent you than what a legal service recommends.
Personally, I self insure for this risk for a number of reasons, including the fact that I am lucky enough to be able to come up with $30k in the unlikely event that I need to do so. But the correct answer for me is not necessarily the correct answer for anyone else. The likelihood of you needing legal counsel for a SD shooting is extremely low. If one can come up with a decent amount of cash, somehow, to cover themselves should that ever happen, then they might want to self insure. If they can't, then a service like this one might make sense. And note that I said "come up with". Not "easily afford". Come up with includes things like taking out a second mortgage, selling off assets like a second vehicle, etc.
But yes, I am sure that the insurance provider (medical or otherwise) will try to minimize their payouts wherever possible. My medical insurance provider's latest thing is mandating that I pay an extra fee (over and above the annual out of pocket "max") if I want to get my prescriptions at a pharmacy instead of mail order. So if one does get insurance for any risk, they should make sure they fully understand all of the terms and conditions. Including the ability to choose your own attorney, or knowing exactly who the service will provide for you.
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.
The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.
I agree with this assessment. I think that these companies realize that there is a very low probability of needing to "pay out" and that this is a very lucrative business. The NRA has jumped in big time with television advertising and there are multiple companies involved. Insurance, prepaid legal, call it what you want but the only reason these companies are doing this is because there is money to be made. It's not like being told by state insurance commission that you must insure gulf coast homes for hurricanes. If they can charge $200 per Texas LTC carrier and only 10% of Texas LTC sign up that is still 100,000 people and that is $20,000,000 if my calculator is right. You can buy a few lawyers with that kind of money.
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.
The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.
I agree with this assessment. I think that these companies realize that there is a very low probability of needing to "pay out" and that this is a very lucrative business. The NRA has jumped in big time with television advertising and there are multiple companies involved. Insurance, prepaid legal, call it what you want but the only reason these companies are doing this is because there is money to be made. It's not like being told by state insurance commission that you must insure gulf coast homes for hurricanes. If they can charge $200 per Texas LTC carrier and only 10% of Texas LTC sign up that is still 100,000 people and that is $20,000,000 if my calculator is right. You can buy a few lawyers with that kind of money.
There is a reason why Warren Buffet owns insurance companies.
I forgot which service it was but buyer's beware; on one of them stated that you don't pay anything out of your pocket unless you lose/get convicted. That alone would worry me, if you get 2 charges, one for manslaughter and another for some misdemeanor and you get convicted for that, you might find yourself in unexpected trouble...
superstar wrote:I forgot which service it was but buyer's beware; on one of them stated that you don't pay anything out of your pocket unless you lose/get convicted. That alone would worry me, if you get 2 charges, one for manslaughter and another for some misdemeanor and you get convicted for that, you might find yourself in unexpected trouble...
The Cary Guard FAQ says "If criminal charges are brought against you, the criminal defense costs sublimit will reimburse you for any expenses related to your criminal defense if you are acquitted."
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
superstar wrote:I forgot which service it was but buyer's beware; on one of them stated that you don't pay anything out of your pocket unless you lose/get convicted. That alone would worry me, if you get 2 charges, one for manslaughter and another for some misdemeanor and you get convicted for that, you might find yourself in unexpected trouble...
The Cary Guard FAQ says "If criminal charges are brought against you, the criminal defense costs sublimit will reimburse you for any expenses related to your criminal defense if you are acquitted."
So if you are not acquitted.........they come out ahead and don't pay. I think I want a plan that helps me not be acquitted.
This also reminds me that I will need an attorney to read and interpret the fine print for all of these plans.
rotor wrote:
So if you are not acquitted.........they come out ahead and don't pay. I think I want a plan that helps me not be acquitted.
This also reminds me that I will need an attorney to read and interpret the fine print for all of these plans.
Some will have that piece of mind getting that legal service but when Murphy's law come o' knocking they'll surprisingly find out that they should have read and ask all that there is to it. If it's in print there is no reason but to blame themselves.
Why pay an atty. to read the contract so you can sign a legal service for another lawyer? If you are going to pay an atty. make sure he's the one that will represent you, otherwise you'll be paying for redundant services. If there is something you don't understand call and ask and request to explain to you both in verbal and printed notice.
superstar wrote:I forgot which service it was but buyer's beware; on one of them stated that you don't pay anything out of your pocket unless you lose/get convicted. That alone would worry me, if you get 2 charges, one for manslaughter and another for some misdemeanor and you get convicted for that, you might find yourself in unexpected trouble...
The Cary Guard FAQ says "If criminal charges are brought against you, the criminal defense costs sublimit will reimburse you for any expenses related to your criminal defense if you are acquitted."
Yes, some of those companies are selling true insurance which means they only reimburse. They don't help you out right away. Others will get a lawyer for you immediately and help with bail and such. Yes, you can do those things yourself also if you can afford to maintain that sort of emergency fund.
superstar wrote:I forgot which service it was but buyer's beware; on one of them stated that you don't pay anything out of your pocket unless you lose/get convicted. That alone would worry me, if you get 2 charges, one for manslaughter and another for some misdemeanor and you get convicted for that, you might find yourself in unexpected trouble...
The Cary Guard FAQ says "If criminal charges are brought against you, the criminal defense costs sublimit will reimburse you for any expenses related to your criminal defense if you are acquitted."
So if you are not acquitted.........they come out ahead and don't pay. I think I want a plan that helps me not be acquitted.
This also reminds me that I will need an attorney to read and interpret the fine print for all of these plans.
There is usually also language that says they can drop you if they judge that what you did was not self defense. That gives them an out, but if they use it, they better be certain because the backlash if they leave a gun owner hanging out to dry could be harsh.
twomillenium wrote:Make sure that your are aware of self defense insurance and pre-paid legal service. There is a difference.
+1 million. This!
From one of those shields sites... " This Legal Service Contract is not an insurance contract." "...is not a law firm and any legal services are provided by independent third-party contracting attorneys."
Think about that. You might as well put aside a little money for the a problem arises fund. The attorney can not represent you when your case goes to the grand jury, it is just you, the grand jury and the prosecutor presenting the case, and if it is a bill then that's when I would start looking for one and not what a legal service would recommend.
Your atty won't be in front of the grand jury with you but as long as you are in the right, in a "user friendly" self defense state a good atty will keep you from ever having to go before the GJ and at worst be able to prepare you well should you have to.
As for us, after much discussion between the wife and I we chose to have both the protection and a separate insurance policy as well. For a few hundred bucks a year it's a whole lot of piece of mind knowing that should we ever end up in such a situation we won't end up bankrupt for having acted in a completely lawful and reasonable manner.
Even in states that have such user friendly self defense statutes all it takes is one overly zealous DA and/or significant political pressure for them to be willing to make a martyr out of you.
NRA Life MemberNRA Certified Instructor RSO, CRSO, USCCA Certified Instructor TX LTC licensed Instructor Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor. Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.
Personally I have an attorney and bail bondsman on retainer. I pay a flat fee to have Alan Dershowitz available to me at any time for his regular fee of $1000hr, even if he’s in the middle of a seminar at Harvard Law School. My bondsman will provide a cash bond of up $1,000,000 in any court in the US 24/7. Last time I needed it was when I was going to “take the ride” for carrying concealed with a license on city property that had a 1” circle slash gun sign on the back loading bay door. Once Prof. Dershowitz was done talking to the cop, the LEO wrote himself a ticket for disorderly conduct.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
It has been a long time since I have looked into these things. I just poked around again reading a few of the popular ones. So as I am “emergency personnel” Texas State Guard, I have defence to 30.06. Does this mean that if I use my firearm inside such location or an arrested in such location I am still technically in violation of the legal services coverage? From what I read, they inplied that you are NOT covered in a place of restricted areas wether it be Federal, State, or local law.
"Jump in there sport, get it done and we'll all sing your praises." -Chas
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
$200 per year multiplied by the extremely low probability that the service gets used? Sure, they can easily afford a good lawyer for you. It's just like insurance. Do I really think that the insurance company will pay me $400,000 to replace my house if it burns down even though I am only paying a tiny fraction of that amount in annual premiums? Why yes, I do. Should I think about that again? Maybe, but I will probably reach the same conclusion.
The fact is that if you want to self insure for these risks, you can (where legally allowed). And you will probably be better off. The exact amount that you will probably be better off is equal to the insurance companies overhead costs + profit divided by the number of policy holders (otherwise known as Expected Value, or EV). To put it in terms of statistics / gambling, your EV is higher by self insuring (unless you find an insurance company with really bad actuaries), but your variance is also dramatically lower by insuring. You are paying the insurance company for this reduction in variance.
The insurance analogy was good, but let's say instead of housing insurance is medical insurance. Just because you pay for the medical insurance does not mean you will get the best doctor, you will get the doctor they recommend. Is it a bargain for $200 per year to have a legal service? of course it is. Would it be a great lawyer they recommend? Only you will know when the case ends. Would you bet your life (behind bars) on it? I wouldn't. I would research the best attorney that my money could buy and if you find that said atty. retainer's fee is $30K I'm pretty confident that they will take installments and not touch your case until their fee is paid. A much better scenario in my opinion where you have complete control on who you would want to represent you than what a legal service recommends.
You'll find out in all likelihood if you have the lawyer you need within 24-48hrs and if you're not confident in the competency of the lawyer provided you can always hire another.
Personally I like knowing I'm immediately covered and that they can and will bail me out if necessary.
NRA Life MemberNRA Certified Instructor RSO, CRSO, USCCA Certified Instructor TX LTC licensed Instructor Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor. Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.
For me, at a certain level, there's an 80/20 component to this analysis. The insurance's potential imperfection is counterweighted by the low-hanging-ness of its fruit. It may not supply the ideal representation in a claim scenario, but it only costs X, and it supplies content (website, seminars) that potentially offers value which reduces the face value of X. And then with some of these insurance services, there are coupons and special offers by affiliated third parties to even further reduce the effective cost of the premium, if one is a user of those particular offered goods and services. So arguably, it ends up being something that is hopefully a little bit better than nothing, for a relatively low net price.
