Laugh Out Loud Laugh Out Loud:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 26 of 26

Thread: NRA Existence Threatened

  1. #16
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,010
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1093 Post(s)
    In one of the articles, they're bitching that the NRA delivered a $25 discounted NRA membership along with a year's "insurance" coverage, and that the NRA is marketing the insurance coverage as "developed by" the NRA (though provided/administered by Lockton). Despite Lockton (the insurer) having been licensed by the finance department of NYS, apparently these other "offerings" are considered part of the coverage ... and they're noting that the NRA has not been licensed to offer insurance by the department.

    Strange, if that's the basis of their concerns. This appears to be disallowed.

    The consent decree's a little hard to follow, first noting that the insurance provider (Lockton) is licensed in the state of NY. But they then grouse that the provider of freebies and "wrapper" discounts surrounding the marketing of the coverage (NRA) is not itself licensed to provide insurance (which they're not providing) in the state of NY. Seems they're suggesting that offering anything at all to such customers constitutes unlicensed provision of insurance coverage, despite the fact that the insurance coverage company (Lockton) is licensed.

    Heck, I'm sure that there was a printing company involved in creation of the promotional materials, and the USPS was involved in the mailing of such materials ... but they weren't license as "providers" of any service, discount or item to those customers in the state of NY either. Why weren't they all hauled before the committee to get raked over the coals for supposed non-compliance with NY (committee) law?

    Time will tell, whether a judge (a NY judge) or jury will take the NY finance dept. out to the woodshed for cause, or rubber-stamp this garbage.

    JMO
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  2. #17
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    698
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    379 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In one of the articles, they're bitching that the NRA delivered a $25 discounted NRA membership along with a year's "insurance" coverage, and that the NRA is marketing the insurance coverage as "developed by" the NRA (though provided/administered by Lockton). Despite Lockton (the insurer) having been licensed by the finance department of NYS, apparently these other "offerings" are considered part of the coverage ... and they're noting that the NRA has not been licensed to offer insurance by the department.

    Strange, if that's the basis of their concerns. This appears to be disallowed.

    The consent decree's a little hard to follow, first noting that the insurance provider (Lockton) is licensed in the state of NY. But they then grouse that the provider of freebies and "wrapper" discounts surrounding the marketing of the coverage (NRA) is not itself licensed to provide insurance (which they're not providing) in the state of NY. Seems they're suggesting that offering anything at all to such customers constitutes unlicensed provision of insurance coverage, despite the fact that the insurance coverage company (Lockton) is licensed.

    Heck, I'm sure that there was a printing company involved in creation of the promotional materials, and the USPS was involved in the mailing of such materials ... but they weren't license as "providers" of any service, discount or item to those customers in the state of NY either. Why weren't they all hauled before the committee to get raked over the coals for supposed non-compliance with NY (committee) law?

    Time will tell, whether a judge (a NY judge) or jury will take the NY finance dept. out to the woodshed for cause, or rubber-stamp this garbage.

    JMO
    I am not sure about the particulars, but it is against the law (regulations) in every state to discount or give rewards to get an insurance policy. For example: an insurance agent cannot give out free pizza coupons or tickets to a football game for purchasing insurance as an incentive.

  3. #18
    Senior Member Chicken Rancher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    South of Canada and North of Mexico
    Posts
    1,336
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    141 Post(s)
    Just read that article before coming here. We just need to be very aware that when the time comes that the dems are in control again, they will come for our guns period. I have no doubt.

  4. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    758
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    78 Post(s)
    NRA filed a lawsuit against New York, stating that New York State has implemented regulations to backball & cut off the NRA's financial operations , and to try to do anything they can to harm their existence. Many are taking this to mean the NRA may cease to exist. I take it they are saying they are discriminating and blacklisting anything gun--related, manufacturers, and anything they can related to the NRA with financial institutions, insurance, and to try to unduly restrict them from operating "legal business and organizations" ... and that this cannot stand. Of course, the Dem's want to destroy the NRA ... and will start claiming success they are destroying the NRA. So, I suggest we take all that with a questionable flavor... to sell their agenda before the elections. The NRA is fighting another battle over gun-rights again & the 2nd Amendment. .


    Quote : "Over several months, the NRA has taken aim at the state of New York and its financial regulators after the state ruled the NRA's insurance, "Carry Guard," was illegal because it gave liability protection to gun owners for acts where there was "intentional wrongdoing." "


    I'll be waiting to see if they can show any case, where the Insurance covered anyone, for "intentional wrongdoing". LOL


    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ist/902918002/

  5. #20
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    698
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    379 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by eagleks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    NRA filed a lawsuit against New York, stating that New York State has implemented regulations to backball & cut off the NRA's financial operations , and to try to do anything they can to harm their existence. Many are taking this to mean the NRA may cease to exist. I take it they are saying they are discriminating and blacklisting anything gun--related, manufacturers, and anything they can related to the NRA with financial institutions, insurance, and to try to unduly restrict them from operating "legal business and organizations" ... and that this cannot stand. Of course, the Dem's want to destroy the NRA ... and will start claiming success they are destroying the NRA. So, I suggest we take all that with a questionable flavor... to sell their agenda before the elections. The NRA is fighting another battle over gun-rights again & the 2nd Amendment. .


    Quote : "Over several months, the NRA has taken aim at the state of New York and its financial regulators after the state ruled the NRA's insurance, "Carry Guard," was illegal because it gave liability protection to gun owners for acts where there was "intentional wrongdoing." "


    I'll be waiting to see if they can show any case, where the Insurance covered anyone, for "intentional wrongdoing". LOL


    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ist/902918002/
    Remind me to NEVER EVER click on a USAToday link. The amount of ads and junk was unbeleivable. Even with AdBlock it had my laptop going crazy

    OT: Intentional acts are defined different by the producer of the policy. Most policies define Under Section II Part E for Liability that even if you hit someone over the head with a baseball bat, the insurer will defend you in a lawsuit since it was justifiable under the contract (like the guy was breaking in the house and was threatening someone) Of course that is not the exact verbaige LOL. But if you are doing what is necessary to protect yourself and property under the law, you should be protected.

    That is an "intentional act" which is allowed (or excluded) depending on contract.

  6. #21
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,010
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1093 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Siam View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I am not sure about the particulars, but it is against the law (regulations) in every state to discount or give rewards to get an insurance policy. For example: an insurance agent cannot give out free pizza coupons or tickets to a football game for purchasing insurance as an incentive.
    Consider auto/driving insurance policies. There's the "good driver" discount ... not smoking ... having had the policy for a long time discount ... Not all such things relate to one's actual risk as a driver. Many of which amount to $x dollars of discount for participation. Which isn't really materially different than $25 off on the first year for coming to the policy, or general market price competition for the service in the first place.

    Seems a matter of interpretation by the committee (Dept.) to me. And a petty one at that.

    As others have noted, they also don't see to like the concept of covering certain (initial) legal expenses for "intentional acts" like self-defense (at a time when it's legally presumed to be self-defense). As though self-defense cannot be legit, simply because it involved the use of arms to accomplish it, presupposing that the mere fact it required that degree of force means it must have been an inappropriate use of force.

    Something smells rotten in the barrel.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  7. #22
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    698
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    379 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Consider auto/driving insurance policies. There's the "good driver" discount ... not smoking ... having had the policy for a long time discount ... Not all such things relate to one's actual risk as a driver. Many of which amount to $x dollars of discount for participation. Which isn't really materially different than $25 off on the first year for coming to the policy, or general market price competition for the service in the first place.

    Seems a matter of interpretation by the committee (Dept.) to me. And a petty one at that.

    As others have noted, they also don't see to like the concept of covering certain (initial) legal expenses for "intentional acts" like self-defense (at a time when it's legally presumed to be self-defense). As though self-defense cannot be legit, simply because it involved the use of arms to accomplish it, presupposing that the mere fact it required that degree of force means it must have been an inappropriate use of force.

    Something smells rotten in the barrel.
    Apples and oranges. I am not talking about discounts for things related to the policy and risk or allowed discounts authorized the states department of insurance. I am talking about it is not allowed for an insurance agent to give tickets, or other incentives, like membership fees in order to get an insurance policy issued. Look up insurance laws. It isn't a matter of interpretation. It is pretty crystal clear.

    It is called rebating, That is illegal.

    Discounts for good driving are not rebates. No interpreation of the law is needed. If you doubt me, go ask your insurance agent if they can give you a gift card for Pizza Hut if you buy a new policy from them or for them to pay for an NRA membership for that matter. In fact, it is illegal for them to even reduce thier commisison to pay for part of the policy as an incentive.

    Aside from the insurance discussion. We all do agee it is not looking good for the NRA and this is a set up, a legal one at that, but still a conspiacy to hurt the NRA.
    Last edited by Siam; August 4th, 2018 at 11:35 AM.

  8. #23
    Senior Member Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,079
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    347 Post(s)
    The NRA is not going to cease to exist .

    They may not be allowed to sell questionable insurance.

    Honestly if they did lose most of their membership to HPA or all of it, we would have been without NFA ,GCA, and NICS ,. Can't forget force of law signage which is their darling signature laws .

    GOA never calls for gun regulatoons
    Odd how most folks who say they support the Constitution as written ,,,,,,,,,,,,really don't.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Nakyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Under the Twister
    Posts
    3,461
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1006 Post(s)
    The NRA will be fine. They might not be able to offer insurance, but they'll be fine. JMO

  10. #25
    1911 Addicted spclopr8tr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    southeastern TN
    Posts
    1,521
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    52 Post(s)
    It is just one more tactical engagement in the never ending war on our 2A rights. You win a few, you lose a few. But the war WILL continue, and think the NRA will be just fine. The Carry Guard program, maybe not so fine unless they can find another insurer without deep connections to NY.
    NRA Patriot Life Member (Patron), SAF - CCRKBA, NAGR, Handgunlaw.us Donor, TFALAC

  11. #26
    Curmudgeon OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    11,058
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1515 Post(s)
    The NRA should be in good shape. I re-upped for two more years.
    Official Forum Curmudgeon Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
    Tact: The skill of telling people to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •