Last week we reported on the NRA dis-inviting the United States Concealed Carry Association as an exhibitor at this week’s NRA convention in Atlanta. The obvious reason: the NRA is getting into the USCCA’s line of business in a big way and didn’t want a direct competitor there. Fair enough…it’s their party.
This week, the gun rights org issued a press release officially announcing the new program:
ATLANTA – On Monday, the National Rifle Association of America announced the launch of NRA Carry Guard, a program created to provide America’s most comprehensive insurance and legal coverage, as well as best-in-class training for those who carry a gun. NRA Carry Guard members can access many great benefits including legal assistance and the ability to select their own counsel, as well as immediate access as needed to supplementary payments for bail, legal retainer fees, compensation while in court and more. NRA Carry Guard is the only membership program for self-defense insurance and training developed and supported by the National Rifle Association, representing the next evolution in freedom’s defense from the most powerful civil rights organization in American history.
Read the full press release here.
As RF found as he strolled though the Georgia World Congress center today, the NRA is pushing the Carry Guard program with all the nuance and subtlety we’ve come to expect from their pitches. What’s in your wallet?
OK…it’s great to have options. I’m sure I’ll find out with my new NRA membership.
Dana must be proud. Each boob has got to be eight feet in diameter. But why no gat in the pic? Can’t be any less scary than 16 feet of Dana.
Got something against boobs?
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. What a weird fckin comment!
Shoddy treatment of USCCA. I am much less likely to increase my support of NRA beyond simple membership.
Agreed. I am not a member of USCCA; life member of NRA.
“Fair enough…it’s their party.” I DIS-agree. The NRA is a membership organization that ought to be concerned for the welfare of its members. While it’s fine for the NRA to sell whatever good services it can (both to provide services and raise revenue) it is NOT fine for it to push-out others providing competing services. As the top-dog in the PotG community I expect NRA to show some class.
It for precisely this reason – baring USCCA from exhibiting – that I will NEVER consider buying NRA’s competing product.
Moreover, this introduces a conflict of interest where one of the most insinuous threats against 2A rights is “gun insurance requirements”.
Imagine if the NRA started selling biometric trigger locks. It would be a debacle.
They should stay on the advocacy and education side of the issue, and avoid doing things that hurt gunowners’ trust in their dedication.
EDIT: This originally said “impartiality”, which was the wrong word. We want them to be partial to gunowners’ rights.
I meant “insidious”, not “insinuous”, as well. I blame not getting my coffee this morning.
Advocacy organizations often evolve into a business. NRA has long ago crossed that line. Their stock-in-trade is promoting fear about impending gun control and selling you the solution. But all too often they compromise with the gun grabbers and tell their angry members that it was the best deal they could get. Then they mail out the next fear mongering appeal for money.
Agreed. Carry Guard is a monumental money making scheme.
People actually shooting people in self defense is an extremely rare event. Carry Guard rates of hundreds of dollars a year is simply obscene, gouging members to make a buck.
US Law Sheild is a better choice.
Since I am a member of both, I’m interested in which is better and how.
Huh, so the NRA lobbies the government for gun rights. The government wants to require insurance for all CCW. Why would the NRA stand up and say no, considering they’re now a business and profit from CCWers. No thanks. JUST SAY NO, before you’re over a barrel.
NRA could save millions if they would just stop sending all the mail begging for more money! I would gladly give $100 if they would promise to send me no more mail!
I have said this before; the NRA squanders way too much $ begging for more $, kind of makes me pissed off. Belong to both USCCA & NRA. Interesting to see how this plays out.
No doubt they wouldn’t be sending the mailers if it didn’t return a positive ROI.
There have been studies that show that if a charity allows you to opt out of mailing lists begging for money, their total contributions received goes up. Generally they will let you opt in to a program where you get a once yearly reminder, which makes sense to me. There is no way in hell I’m going to contribute every time they come begging, but if they only sent me solicitations once a year, I wound probably donate $100 or so when I got it, which would be $100 more per year then I currently donate.
If you are a member you can request they remove you from their snail mail program (they will then only send you a reminder near when your membership needs renewing…)
True. Most years I miss the renewal notice because the NRA sends so much crap I just automatically throw everything they send me in the trash.
Send me that $100 and I promise I won’t send you any mail.
All you need to do is ask them to stop sending requests for support to you in the mail. Once that is done (if your feeble brain can manage to complete that one simple task), the burden to the mailman will be relieved.
I’ve been a life member for decades and don’t get anything from them other than my copy of American Rifleman.
Does your feeble brain comprehend that the point everyone is trying to make is that the NRA is biting the hand that feeds them by hounding members to the point of borderline harassment with their constant begging. Anyone who blindly becomes a life member of anything without considering the very real chance that somewhere down the line they might do or say something in their policies that you strongly dissagree with is a sheep. Like maybe disinviting the USCCA less that three weeks prior to a major event. Or, remember when LaPiere caved after sandy hook? F the NRA, there are plenty of real gun rights orgs out there.
To the editors, can we have an article on the breakdown of the available insurance programs soon?
As for NRA barring USCCA, it does not enthuse me. When Sprint and Nationwide took over in Nascar, they didn’t ban competitors. I think the NRA could learn something there.
Competition is good so I’d also be interested in a breakdown…
For right now, the Armed Citizen’s Legal Defense Network has a pretty good comparison of what is out there, complete with a history of the concept of such insurance/assistance groups. It was last updated April 7th and I would expect it to be further updated with the new NRA offering once they can analyze it. You can find it here: https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/buyersguide
Horse crap. The nra just wants the money that these trailblazing companies deserve for creating the market and catering to the firearm owners. Personally I am a member of the Armed Citizens’ Legal Defense Network, and will never leave them. The nra guard is just a johnny come lately. I am a life member of the nra, so I am not just a regular hater.
Competition in the market is a good thing. It allows price competition and the option for personal choices.
I have lagged in the search for carry protection insurance, but with the increased competition I will definitely be looking at the different offerings now, including the NRA CG.
The NRA looks bad here…they are supposed to be a civil/constitutional rights organization, not an insurance company. I don’t like this direction they headed in.
My questions are 1:How do they charge the deductable? Is it by the number of perps shot or just by the incident? 2: Where can I purchase my Free Speech insurance and what would the deductable be on telling all the members of congress to lick me?
“+2,000,000 Thumbs up !!! ”
Unfortunately, my 1st Amendment Licensing, Registration, and Free-Speech insurance has a very high ceiling…I can’t comment any further because I’m NOT a member of the “Free-Press, or Fake NEWS media…”e
Looks like the 2nd Amendment is going to be heading into an actual privilege based system based on ones income inorder to purchase Mandatory 2nd Amendment insurance….And the reason I say a Privilege based on income….Because the question will most likely boil down to if you can afford all of your 2nd Amendment rights….This will suddenly become a Privileged carve-out group…Like the class 3 FFL licensing….The little people will have a Bottle of Pepper squirt picked out for them by their favorite NRA /Government representative…Only likes of the NRA stars will have the Privilege of the to keep and bear arms…like Ted Nuggent, etc…Becase they’ll be able to afford it !!! No “[email protected] Obama-care ” for the rest of us#!!! Sounds like a future sellout to me….Maybe ill just stick with GOA…..
Damn right. When the $200 NFA tax was instated it was equal to $3,642 today. How many “average joes” could drop 3.5K a year to exercise a right? I bet it ends up higher than that…probably with a 10k deductable. Piss on all of it.
Well, they had to come up with some way to make money now that the Rs control the government.
Gunfighter insurance is getting to be very big business.
Interesting thought: if some future Congress tried to pass a law requiring gun owners to hold insurance, would the NRA fight it?
Did they finally cross it this time or did they do that years ago?
Actual article topic aside, Mr. Loesch is a very lucky man.
Somehow if Constitutional Carry, is passed (good luck), will require the good guy to carry insurance. Mark my words. This will become an issue.
Any idea of cost(s) of this? Maybe a comparo of the various protection offers is in the works?
Options are great. Not a fan of the strong arm tactics booting out their longtime exhibitors – now competitors. I’m still a supporter of their core mission: gun rights. Have no interest in any of their branded ‘products’
The NRA seems to be going down the same road as AARP, multiple types of insurance programs, travel and the occasional advocacy.
The NRA seems to be going UP the same cankered sphincter as AARP.
There, fixed it for ya.
“Fair enough…it’s their party.”
This close to the convention? Not fair at all, especially if USCCA had paid for space.
I don’t see the need for carry insurance in Idaho. Responsible gun owners don’t go to jail here. Only douchebags.
Travel much? I do, USCCA covers you in all 50.
Wow, NRA co-opted by space aliens or something?
Way to pile-on there. If the NRA can just make cc/firearms insurance affordable THEN EVERYONE WILL HAVE TO HAVE IT, in an everytown for common-sense-yeah-right sort of way.
Thanks for nothing, can’t believe we’ve paid you to tax us.
Joe finally said something that made sense, in his own bizarre-ass way.
I’ve been bashed around here for years for pointing out that the NRA doesn’t serve any purpose oither than to sponge cash off honest people…
“But but, who else would be fighting for our gun rights?!?!?1111”
I dunno, maybe if half you slackjaws would actually get out in your own communities and talk to people you wouldn’t need some overpaid bundle of ivy-leaguers who can’t possible represent you try to represent you. Said ivy-leaguers haven’t exactly paid dividends.
^^THIS^^ +100000. F the NRA! I’m fully convinced the only side they are on is their own!
I smell a carry insurance law passed in the near future with the full support of the NRA.
Is that what that smell is??? I thought it was the constitution slowly burning.
This looks like something else to prevent citizens from exercising their civil rights…And another future barrier setup by my local/state police in my state from “allowing” peasants and commoners from bearing arms outside of the knights of the round table, Samurai, or the Sheriff of Nottingham….
So if you like your insurance plan, you can keep it?
This looks really bad. Life NRA member here. And, USCCA member. Won’t be giving any more money to the NRA. Stay in your lane and stop trying to run our friends and partners in the fight out of business.
I never gave the NRA any money other than the yearly dues. I felt way too much $ was wasted with the constant, large full color mailings begging for more $. I really like the USCCA, been with them from early on with the insurance program. Their magazine is also absolutely first rate and has won a few publications awards including best magazine in it’s category. I intend to stay with the USCCA & let the NRA membership just run out. Seeing pics of the HUGE signs at the NRA convention promoting their new insurance, no wonder they booted Tim’s company out. They obviously are afraid the completion may be better. Hope that completion makes everyone better though.
Uh oh, more doom and gloom in the Trump era. But at least it ain’t Hillary. Both dumb blondes.
CarryGuard is “reimbursement after acquittal”. Other than the 20% expense/retainer amount, you have to pre-fund the defense and do not get paid back if there is a plea bargain or lesser charge conviction. Also, you do not get the legal fees used to manage a case that never goes to trial. Some competitors offer up front payment with no obligation to return the $$ no matter how the case turns out.
NRA has to offer less value for the dollar to cover the NRAs commission on the program.
‘ “reimbursement after acquittal”. ‘ If that is correct, that is the same as when USCCA started out; now it’s up front without any reimbursement.
If competition is so great, why then is there all the fuss about anti-gunners competing with the pro-gunners?
Embrace the competition from Bloomberg and Watts.
(for all the mush-for-brains trolls; the above is tongue-in-cheek)
Wow! Just great! And the insurance company gets to determining your self-defense outcomes! [Instructions–on back of card :ALL insured Gun owners are required to call the 1-800# number prior to any self defense situation!]
This doesn’t do much to disavow the idea that the NRA is simply a money making shill for the gun industry. To me, if they were truly about gun rights and the greater good of their membership, they would want competition there so their members would have a choice and be better able to compare those choices. But they clearly aren’t. They are about control and making their program look good.
Another consideration is the NRA’s ability to execute their new program when you report a sd shoot. When I joined the NRA last year it took them six weeks to send me my welcome notice and member card (without the new member promotional gift I selected). Took another six weeks to correct and for them to get me the promo hat. USCCA sent me their new member package within three days.
Last Sat I emailed both the NRA and USCCA with questions about their newest programs. USCCA responded back to me that afternoon, yep on a SAT no less. Contrast that with no response to date from the NRA. If we have a SD shoot, better chance we’ll have quick action from USCCA. I’m renewing with them.
Go look up the new comparison chart for USCCA & NRA; the NRA insurance is a really bad deal with bad coverage.
AGREE, USCCA has the better program (and more experience executing).
In a perfect world, there would be no need to have this sort of insurance. The government would respect your right to self-defense, and if there was any question about whether it was legitimate self-defense there would be simple hearing where the results of an honest and efficient investigation would be presented and the case quickly resolved.
But in a perfect world, everybody would love everybody, there would be no crime or violence, and you wouldn’t need to have a gun for self-defense.
So back here on Planet Earth, people who keep guns for self-defense have a very real and legitimate fear that if they have to use them, an anti-2A prosecutor will charge them with murder, or the criminal or his surviving families will sue for wrongful death. It’s not a bizarre fantasy: there have been plenty of horror stories of people defending themselves or their families ending up bankrupted or in prison.
A few folks on here have made sarcastic comments about this being as crazy as having First Amendment insurance. But … you know that newspapers and publishers routinely DO have insurance to cover them against libel suits, right? The law is supposed to protect me from thieves, but I still have theft coverage on my home and car insurance. Etc.