Unique insurance can protect gun owners against frivolous charges

Yes, all provinces and territories have been said a couple times now.

To the OP, you may want to be very Clear in an edit to your first post saying this. it is not that easy to read all the pages and find this explicitly listed. I know appreciate the heading change, however adding it to the first post I would think everyone reads.
 
GOOD NEWS! Firearm Legal Defence is now available in Quebec! Be sure to tell your friends!

If you are a Quebec resident, contact:

Groupe Cyr & Lyras

Toll Free: 1-855-847-1442

info@cyrlyras.ca

Note that online registration is not available for Quebec. Call or e-mail your name and phone number and a representative will personally prepare your application

interesting thank you.
 
I had this insurance last year. Called in a couple times with legal questions. The responses were within a day, and helpful.
 
I signed up for this. But I wonder if this exclusion means that anything related to RCMP interpretation of prohibited devices or firearm would be excluded:

5. Disputes with any governmental or public body
Any legal costs relating to a review or dispute regarding the lawfulness of any decision or action of any
federal or provincial governmental or quasi – governmental body, or any other local or public authority, other
than in relation to an accepted claim in respect of any event insured under this policy.
 
I signed up for this. But I wonder if this exclusion means that anything related to RCMP interpretation of prohibited devices or firearm would be excluded:

5. Disputes with any governmental or public body
Any legal costs relating to a review or dispute regarding the lawfulness of any decision or action of any
federal or provincial governmental or quasi – governmental body, or any other local or public authority, other
than in relation to an accepted claim in respect of any event insured under this policy.

Ask them?
 
I signed up for this. But I wonder if this exclusion means that anything related to RCMP interpretation of prohibited devices or firearm would be excluded:

5. Disputes with any governmental or public body
Any legal costs relating to a review or dispute regarding the lawfulness of any decision or action of any
federal or provincial governmental or quasi – governmental body, or any other local or public authority, other
than in relation to an accepted claim in respect of any event insured under this policy.

I think that means you can't use the insurance to sue the RCMP. Getting charged with possession of a prohibited device is far above a "dispute"
 
As I mentioned in a previous post, those that have the insurance need to call in and let us know the results of their contact. I already have a number of questions to ask of my own, however since you are a member, call in and ask them and let us all know. The example I would use in this case would be the ruger 10/22 mags now being prohibited, but I bet anything that of the gazillion owners of these mags out there, a LOT of people have no idea they have all of a sudden become 'criminals' by possessing them. I imagine in time we'll see farmer Bob in Saskatchewan arrested for shooting gophers on his land with one of these, simply because he has been doing so for thirty years and didn't get the memo!

Not to be repetitive, but let's utilize the services offered by the insurance and call them!

All the best,
Darren

I signed up for this. But I wonder if this exclusion means that anything related to RCMP interpretation of prohibited devices or firearm would be excluded:

5. Disputes with any governmental or public body
Any legal costs relating to a review or dispute regarding the lawfulness of any decision or action of any
federal or provincial governmental or quasi – governmental body, or any other local or public authority, other
than in relation to an accepted claim in respect of any event insured under this policy.
 
As I mentioned in a previous post, those that have the insurance need to call in and let us know the results of their contact. I already have a number of questions to ask of my own, however since you are a member, call in and ask them and let us all know. The example I would use in this case would be the ruger 10/22 mags now being prohibited, but I bet anything that of the gazillion owners of these mags out there, a LOT of people have no idea they have all of a sudden become 'criminals' by possessing them. I imagine in time we'll see farmer Bob in Saskatchewan arrested for shooting gophers on his land with one of these, simply because he has been doing so for thirty years and didn't get the memo!

Not to be repetitive, but let's utilize the services offered by the insurance and call them!

All the best,
Darren

Not looking to pick a fight but what memo? The law has not changed, the RCMP has passed an opinion which E Division pounced on, I have not heard of it in D Division. We have not been notified of any changes to the law regarding Ruger 10/22 magazines. Now if farmer "Bob" was to be charged over this magazine question I would suggest that is exactly where this insurance should kick in.
 
Not looking to pick a fight but what memo? The law has not changed, the RCMP has passed an opinion which E Division pounced on, I have not heard of it in D Division. We have not been notified of any changes to the law regarding Ruger 10/22 magazines. Now if farmer "Bob" was to be charged over this magazine question I would suggest that is exactly where this insurance should kick in.

Hey John....Ah...see, now there you got me...exactly what I was talking about...getting the right answers....I was told at our local gun show which just ended yesterday that 50 round 10/22 mags were now prohibited...BY A DEALER no less :)

I am not looking to pick any fights in any sense either, just saying we all seem to be signing up for this fantastic insurance product with included legal advice, yet keep speculating via the forum whether they are offering a legitimate service. My only point is to everyone who has a firearm related query, including myself, let's put it to the lawyers they employ and share those answers with the community. We will all benefit in two ways...by proving or disproving the worth of the service...and getting our firearm related inquiries clarified.

I will restrain from using any examples in future other than exact questions which I have posed personally.
 
Hey John....Ah...see, now there you got me...exactly what I was talking about...getting the right answers....I was told at our local gun show which just ended yesterday that 50 round 10/22 mags were now prohibited...BY A DEALER no less :)

I am not looking to pick any fights in any sense either, just saying we all seem to be signing up for this fantastic insurance product with included legal advice, yet keep speculating via the forum whether they are offering a legitimate service. My only point is to everyone who has a firearm related query, including myself, let's put it to the lawyers they employ and share those answers with the community. We will all benefit in two ways...by proving or disproving the worth of the service...and getting our firearm related inquiries clarified.

I will restrain from using any examples in future other than exact questions which I have posed personally.

There is only one problem with legal opinions! They are exactly that nothing more than an opinion. depending on what facts are presented to the lawyer and how the question is worded the answer (opinion) can vary, hence the need for legal insurance. Only a court of law or Parliament can make laws.

If you want free legal advice just look on CGN, this place is full of it! I always try and make sure that everyone knows that my opinion is exactly that, my opinion and has no legal standing, not so many others. :)
 
Found a discount code for $10 in one of the papers we receive CATF001

It is a paid advertisement from FirearmLegalDefense.com that includes the code...no memberships required.
 
wow, took less than 2 minutes to apply and pay.

After that other thread of the guy being charged with 2x possession of prohibited for BEO .50 mags this insurance is a no-brainer.

Funnily enough, the insurance is offered out of my home city of Kelowna, BC. Man, I miss that weather.

Link?
 
So have I, nothing like turning up the heat! I also told them I would post the question and answer here.

I emailed last night and had a message on my answering machine from this morning. In hindsight I should have put my cell number on the application. No answer yet but they definitely seem responsive.
 
I emailed last night and had a message on my answering machine from this morning. In hindsight I should have put my cell number on the application. No answer yet but they definitely seem responsive.

I too have emailed in with a list of questions...will let you know what I get back.

On another note, have you had the opportunity to talk with them yet? If so, what was your 'feeling' of the service provided?
 
I've had it for the last 2 years, just signed up for my 2nd renewal in fact. Worth every penny in peace of mind. A friend of mine had a very expensive court battle which he lost horribly, and he was kicking himself for not signing up. Thought it was too expensive and couldn't afford it at the time. Now he thinks differently.
 
Back
Top Bottom