Lol I'm not sure where you're getting the numbers for "administrative costs" or why you're factoring it in for one, but not the other; but ok.Flash wrote: ↑September 7th, 2020, 1:35 pm
Okay, let's do the math.
You pay $180.00/year for CCW insurance. You pay in 30 years and so you've paid in $5,400.00. The insurance company's total profit for 30 years not counting administrative costs is $400.00. Essentially a break even and Insurance companies don't get in the business for such trivial amounts.
You pay $2,000.00/year for auto insurance. You pay 30 years and you've paid in $60,000.00. You get in a wreck and because the car is 5 years old they give you $30K for it. Total profit $30K. Definitely worth doing especially with large amounts of customers.
Whole different thing.
Take into consideration the risk factor difference between the possibility of an auto collision vs the possibility of being involved in a shooting that requires legal representation.
Statistics show (from 2018) a 1 in 6 chance of death by heart disease (for comparison) and a 1 in 108 chance of death by MVA (motor vehicle accident). For those MVA incidents, all of them (95% or more) will include some use of autmotive insurance; and those are JUST the deaths. There's over 6 million car accidents every year with nearly 230 million livensed drivers in the US. Again, pretty much all of them will involve insurance.
Death by firearms are listed at 1 of 315, meaning the chance of a violent encounter with the use of a firearm is already much lower. As is the chance that an individual defending themselves even has insurance. As is the chance they even need to use it, and require legal representation. The list goes on. Depending on which statistics you believe, there's between 500,000 and 3 million self defense uses of firearms every year with 393 million guns in the country (more than the population of the whole country *HELL YES!*). But how many of those people even have the insurance? And how many of them (who do have insurance) will even be in a self defense scenario? And how many of those will actually need the use of legal representation; let alone to the max allotted coverage for their policy?
USCCA is a pretty well respected organization and their cheapest plan comes out to $250/yr for $500k in civil defense & damages protection, as well as $100k in criminal defense, bail bond, and retainer; with additional policies available at higher rates with higher rates of coverage.
Point is, the chance of somebody having to use the insurance for self defense is FAR lower than the chance of needing to use auto insurance. I'm sure there are plenty of caveats and "fine print" instances that need to be reviewed, but I don't doubt that people have used these and/or similar policies for legal representation, and have done so without having to pull teeth to get the company to fulfill their obligation.
It's like people selling volcano insurance to residents in Southern California lol. Obviously a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is many many people who have such insurance will never need it. People will need to make, on an individual level, if it makes sense for them to have such insurance for themselves.
To me, it is. To others, maybe not so much. That's fine. Hopefully nobody here will need to use it. Given the current state of discourse in this country, I'd rather have and not need....