Has the Zimmerman case changed your mind about CCW insurance? - Page 2

View Poll Results: Has the Zimmerman case convinced you to get CCW insurance now?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • I've had it way before Zimmerman was in the news

    15 36.59%
  • I'm getting insurance ASAP.

    1 2.44%
  • This has opened my eyes but don't have it yet.

    16 39.02%
  • Nah! It'll never happen to me. Don't need it.

    9 21.95%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Has the Zimmerman case changed your mind about CCW insurance?

  1. Be aware that if a jury finds the self defense unjustified, you alone will be dragged through financial ruin. You might even be dragged through it in a justified case, if your insurance does not cover it all.

    Check the track record of any company your are considering; serious business, this.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by r1derbike View Post
    Be aware that if a jury finds the self defense unjustified, you alone will be dragged through financial ruin. You might even be dragged through it in a justified case, if your insurance does not cover it all.

    Check the track record of any company your are considering; serious business, this.
    I agree with Rider. The company and the policy should be checked out. There could be in the fine print that you will ONLY be covered if the shooting happens on Feb 29 with a full moon and in the year of the snake or some such mumbo jumbo double legal speak!

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    It's opened my eyes to the possibility of needing it. But in reality, it doesn't cover anything because there is nothing that can make up for me not being there to raise my kids. Money is nothing but painted toilet paper. I have a friend who is an attorney. He's good enough to save me from an overzealous prosecutor.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    Not at all.

    In Ohio, if the shooting is justified (as the shooting of Martin now officially is) then neither the shootee nor anyone else connected to him can recover a penny in damages. They can sue... they just can't collect anything. Good luck finding a lawyer willing to touch THAT...
    Add South Carolina to the mix. Good shoot--no civil case. Let us not forget that insurance companies have very good billing departments but try and get money under a claim and you will be sorely disappointed with fine print and "wheras's"

  6. #15
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    Even though I carry a gun, I make every effort to avoid any situation where I believe confrontation is possible. I hope never to find it necessary to use my gun. I am always aware of possible liability and I do have insurance. I certainly don't want to hurt anyone. I never want to be in a position where I have to live with the knowledge that I harmed someone and always have to wonder if it was really unavoidable. That said, I would defend myself an my family. Insurance is only one more layer of self protection.

    Iowa has only a modified castle doctrine and it isn't called that. In your home you can protect yourself if you believe that your life is in danger. And you are protected from civil liability. There is also no obligation to retreat in your home. But that self defense might be open to interpretation by a court. We do not have a "stand your ground law." You must not knowingly enter a dangerous situation. If you can retreat SAFELY from a threat you are obligated to do so. Only when you believe that your life is in imminent danger can you use force. I would never want never to try to prove to a court that violence was unavoidable.

    Remember, attorneys are professionals when it comes to distorting the truth and twisting the meaning of words. They can search your background for any statement to prove that you're guilty. The internet creates a record of all your statements. And everyone has said things that they didn't really mean. If nothing else the GZ case has made me more aware of my surroundings and everything I write or say.

  7. #16
    JSDinTexas Guest
    I have looked into it and it might be a good idea - Bet Zim's defense cost $100,000+ no matter who's paying for it.
    A couple of things though, be careful who you send the money to, and read the fine print.
    I emailed two potential Concealed Ins providers asking to see their contract or terms of service, and neither even took the time to reply.

  8. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by JSDinTexas View Post
    Bet Zim's defense cost $100,000+ no matter who's paying for it.
    I'm not positive if it was before or after the verdict was read, but I heard O'Mara say that Zimmerman's defense was already over $1 million, and that the various attempts at raising a defense fund had come nowhere near covering that cost as of that interview. He said that he had funded some of the costs himself, and when asked by the interviewer why, he said that once he accepts a case, he's committed, and investigators and experts have to be paid, and he couldn't let the case slip away for a lack of funding. He also committed in the post-verdict presser that he would seek, and get, immunity for GZ in any civil cases that come down the pike. Others here have said the law allows him to do that. I'm not so sure that it applies to someone who went to trial, even if they were acquitted. We'll just have to wait and see about that, because it's almost a certainty that someone will try, but it sounds like O'Mara has committed to stick with the case through that battle, and that means there's going to be a minimum of another hundreds of thousands of dollars that Zimmerman is going to ultimately be responsible for.

    I recall when this first happened that many of us, myself included, scoffed at the notion that Zimmerman would be financially ruined by his actions based on what we thought was immunity being reserved for self defense shooters as clear as could be within the law. I happen to believe wholeheartedly that the verdict was the only correct one to make, and further believe that the case should've never been brought based on the Sanford PD's and prosecutor office's conclusions that it was, indeed, a self defense shooting. Imagine my embarrassment now that I, a staunch far-right conservative who never gives a break to any law enforcement officers/agencies or politicians that I believe are corrupt or abusive or usurpative, have been exposed as terminally naive about the State of Florida following their own laws and protecting George Zimmerman from political prosecution. To all those who said, "No matter what, Zimmerman's financial life is ruined forever," I now apologize for citing the parts of Chapter 776 of the Florida Code that were supposed to protect him from such ruination. This ain't America anymore. It's Thunder Dome, and anything goes in Thunder Dome.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  9. #18
    JSDinTexas Guest
    A million dollars? I wouldn't doubt it. May be the best reason to check into some defense insurance of some sort if one carries daily.

  10. #19
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    The GZ case was s political prosecution instigated by the DOJ and by Obama. The DOJ spent taxpayer's money organizing protests in Florida pressuring the state to indict Zimmerman. The special prosecutor did not seek a grand jury indictment and even withheld evidence in the case from the defence. The demonstrators, the special prosecutor, and the Administration claimed that they wanted justice and got it. In reality these people don't want justice they want revenge for real and imagined past abuses. There were also some who pushed this case for political advantage with the race pimps. The gun control advocates also saw an opportunity here.

    Everything in which progressives are involved is designed to limit or destroy individual rights and control every aspect of life in this country. Total dependency is the desire of progressives, with a Marxist tyranny as the ultimate goal. Individualism, liberty, and the. Constitution are obstacles that must be destroyed. They are very close to their ultimate goal. And we are very close to slavery to an all powerful government. And the unbelievably ignorant majority seem eager for end result.

  11. The US Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) provides Self-Defense Shield (at varying levels) as a service to their members. I was one of the very first to sign up in USCCA and to take advantage of this superior protection. I carry their legal advice card in my wallet that reminds me to keep my mouth shut in the event of an incident. I've also penned the phone number of my experienced self-defense attorney on the card for my first phone call and my wife has the same card in her wallet. I've already reached out to the attorney to establish the Attorney/Client relationship. He has all of my personal information in the event of an incident as well.

    It's called being prepared for the assault "after" the incident. The nightmare of protecting yourself (and those you love) only begins if and when you are forced to pull the trigger!
    There are numerous, good intentioned people in prison because they said or did the wrong thing after using deadly force.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast