I am considering getting Sef-Deense insurance through USCCA, but a recent meeting is causing me to reconsider its marketing practices. I was used to having to listen to a USCCA sales pitch as part of the firearms training California law requires of CCW applicants. I assume that CCW compensates the firearms trainers that allow USCCA sales people to speak to this captured audience. This always bothered me, but what I had to go through as part of my recent renewal causes me to question the ethics of USCAA.
This time the trainer was an attorney and not just any attorney but one that openly acknowledged that USCAA has retained him for the defense of several of its members. Only after the class was over did I realize that my brother member of the bar had more than a conflict of interest. For instance, when another applicant asked the USCAA rep if they would be covered for a self-defense event in a "sensitive place", that attorney pointed out that none of the District Attorneys are enforcing the sensitive place laws since they are patently unsoctitutional.
The above mey be so, but only after completing the training course did I realize that the USCAA rep never said if coverage would be denied if an otherwise covered event occurred while the member was violating the sensirive place laws brought about by SB2. Now I am not saying that USCCA did anything untowards, but I had cause to think whether it was using the attorney/trainer to mislead potential members as to coverage.
This time the trainer was an attorney and not just any attorney but one that openly acknowledged that USCAA has retained him for the defense of several of its members. Only after the class was over did I realize that my brother member of the bar had more than a conflict of interest. For instance, when another applicant asked the USCAA rep if they would be covered for a self-defense event in a "sensitive place", that attorney pointed out that none of the District Attorneys are enforcing the sensitive place laws since they are patently unsoctitutional.
The above mey be so, but only after completing the training course did I realize that the USCAA rep never said if coverage would be denied if an otherwise covered event occurred while the member was violating the sensirive place laws brought about by SB2. Now I am not saying that USCCA did anything untowards, but I had cause to think whether it was using the attorney/trainer to mislead potential members as to coverage.
