Firearm Legal Defence - New Business Member

[b_w.]

Were very much the same in wanting to have the last word. The part that I'm still unclear on is how STERLON would defend the 10/22 mag issue. If the customer is given an option to pin or destroy, and 30 days to do so, would your coverage not just advise the defendant to comply? Pinning/destroying it is a quick easy, and cheap fix, going the distance would cost the insurer $100,000's. Any reasonable person and lawyer would see this as a non-starter. Plus going by the wordings, once you refuse to pin/destroy, aren't you committing a wilful act and therefore voiding coverage? We can have this conversation on the phone, but how would that help the community? Lets be transparent here, DAS legal saw this as an issue and made it clear, this isn't a hill they want to die on. Quite frankly, I can't see anyone getting charged with just simple possession of the 10/22 magazine, even the RCMP bulletin says no one is to be charged. I'd like to also add that if someone is charged with a slew of charges stemming from: storage, display, use, and transportation of a firearm, and the authorities throw in possession of a prohibited mag even DAS would defend the insured against all charges, so this would be a mute point. I'm sorry if I come off combative, it's not my intention.

Once again, I just want to say, you seem like a nice guy, I just know underwriters and lawyers.......... It wouldn't be the first time a broker and U/W misunderstood each other.

I Promise, now you will get the last word, and I'll call you to continue this, who knows maybe we will be good friends after!

Interesting point. I am looking forward to hearing how this conversation goes. Either way I purchased the insurance and feel better with it than without. Just like having a fire extinguisher...hope you never have to use it and that it works when you do.

[LuckyLuc82]

Interesting point. I am looking forward to hearing how this conversation goes. Either way I purchased the insurance and feel better with it than without. Just like having a fire extinguisher...hope you never have to use it and that it works when you do.

I feel the exact same way, the policies are still great for what they were designed for: use, storage, transportation, and display.

[greentips]

If you are associated with CFFR, you will not interfere in a business member forum who is providing a competing product, especially you did not disclose this association.

This is our open warning to those who might be applicable. Stop it right here.

[Capri Insurance]

Interesting point. I am looking forward to hearing how this conversation goes. Either way I purchased the insurance and feel better with it than without. Just like having a fire extinguisher...hope you never have to use it and that it works when you do.

From how it's been explained to me, the pinning requiremt is not a requirement, rather a RCMP interpretation. If you follow the firearms act then the magazine does not need to be pinned as it's a rim fire magazine originally designed for a rifle. This, I believe is where the confusion is. LuckyLuc82 said it best, I hope no one is charged and that the RCMP keep their word that no one will be charged, but just in case they change their mind ( wouldn't be the first time ) people can rest easy knowing they're covered with firearm Legal Defence. I'm happy to hear that you have a policy and hopefully all gun owners will follow suit and we can see an end to false and frivolous charges against law abiding gun owners. Perhaps they can start to focus more on the real problem, criminals and gangs.

[kagia]

Thanks for coming on here and clearing things up. I've had a policy with you guys for a couple years now and plan to renew again.

[Capri Insurance]

Thanks for coming on here and clearing things up. I've had a policy with you guys for a couple years now and plan to renew again.

Glad to hear it. Always happy to know that I was able to answer questions clearly for all of my clients and potential clients.

[Smitticus]

I read over this forum thread yesterday and was very impressed by the professional and level-headed responses from Capri towards all the questions (and repeated questions). I signed up for the service as a result. Hope to never need it, but better safe than sorry.

[Capri Insurance]

I read over this forum thread yesterday and was very impressed by the professional and level-headed responses from Capri towards all the questions (and repeated questions). I signed up for the service as a result. Hope to never need it, but better safe than sorry.

Thank you. Don't forgot that even though you hope to never need the Defence part of the policy, you can use the free telephone legal advice service every day if you want. The best part about the free service is that you can use it for any subject, not just firearms questions. You can call and speak to a lawyer about taxes, probate, family or any other type of law you can think of. Use it all day, every day.

[auditman]

Good Debate. Can I still get a discount? i'm a CCFR member. Just bought the policy last night.

thx

[uglydukwling]

I see an exclusion for charges involving failure to register. This could be a serious problem, especially for collectors. There are likely to be instances where the charge depends on a dispute over the status of a firearm. Is it prohibited? restricted? non-restricted? antique? deactivated? scrap metal? The RCMP's interpretation of some detail may well be different from that of a rational person.

There is also an exclusion for charges involving willful, negligent disregard, etc. Since most charges will probably allege something like this, does that mean that the insured will not be defended against such allegations?