A recent "stand your ground" trial here in Central Florida got me thinking about the need. I'm on the fence. Any experiences are welcomed, favorable or otherwise.
|Hoping for better pharmaceuticals|
Armed citizen network may be of interest. They pay upfront (see conditions) and not after you are found to be no guilty as some other insurance policies. I have it as do others who shoot with me.
Getting shot is no achievement. Hitting your enemy is.
I'd have no interest in CC insurance. If there's any issue here, it's doing the correct thing from the get-go.
Appreciate the info.
Yup. Im certain insurance purchased would be twisted into some sort of intent to kill by any prosecuting atty.
Foster's, Australian for Bud
I do not think that is true. Does carrying auto insurance imply you're looking to get into an accident? Does buying dental insurance mean you have no intention of brushing your teeth?
There are a lot of sources of possible insurance out there to cover the cost of self-defense aftermath. Some are pure insurance. Others are "memberships". Here is a table I put together a couple of years ago when I was looking into coverage for myself (NOTE: I did this a couple of years ago and have not updated the table since -- you need to go to these sources yourself to verify their current coverage policies and prices). It may be of use to the OP as he searches out providers and weighs the potential cost/benefit that they may provide to him:
|Little ray |
Sapper Steel is right. He is more right than he knows, in fact.
That the defendant is insured is not relevant evidence. That means it is inadmissible. The justification for the rule is that the existence of insurance doesn't have a tendency to prove or disprove what actually happened. Therefore it is irrelevant. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible. Plus, it is prejudicial, as jurors may think that if insurance is paying, they may as well throw the plaintiff some money.
This is a well established rule in any U.S. jurisdiction.
The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
Also some states have it set up that you are innocent until proven guilty. Some states are also set up were burden of proof of it not being self defense are on the state. As in if your on my property, I shoot you, and tell responding deputies you broke in and branished a weapon, and those facts are correct, I do not go to jail. I dont even think I lose the weapon used.
Used guns deserve a home too
|Powered by Social Strata|