part-time
Member
Just wondering..
Do you or should you insure your firearms
- Thread starter part-time
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I do not. It would require a picture of each one, plus serial numbers on file with my insurance co. They are secure however.
Not required if you buy the NRA linked insurance.
Only firearms $2,500 or over must be scheduled but serial numbers are not required.And by the way, the first $2500 of insurance is free with NRA membership. Win-win. The insurance alone is worth the membership.
NRA Endorsed Insurance Program - ArmsCare Plus Firearms Coverage
Last edited:
LoadedRound
Member
To the original question:
Yes and Yes.
Not all companies and policies require you to schedule your firearms. Some homeowner policies treat firearms same as other personal property and others offer fairly large "blanket" coverage.
Yes and Yes.
Not all companies and policies require you to schedule your firearms. Some homeowner policies treat firearms same as other personal property and others offer fairly large "blanket" coverage.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
I dont. I was already ripped off to the tune of about $4,500s, maybe more in guns and my insurance agent talked me out of fileing. The tune was I would only get about $2,500s and I would be lucky to have them insure me again and if I did it was going to be out of sight, I would have to also have to install a monitored alarm system to just qualify etc, etc.
I took her advice, wish I hadnt and wish I would have pushed the issue to the bitter end. That was the time I wrote of several times where my dad died in wisconsin, I took all the family guns home to california, my safe was already full. Had to leave them loose in the house and was burgulared a few days later. Thats the short version.
I took her advice, wish I hadnt and wish I would have pushed the issue to the bitter end. That was the time I wrote of several times where my dad died in wisconsin, I took all the family guns home to california, my safe was already full. Had to leave them loose in the house and was burgulared a few days later. Thats the short version.
I don't. I prefer my insurance agent to not know what I have.
I tend to believe that people buy too much insurance. The way I look at it, I only insure those items that would impose too great a financial burden to replace.
My guns don't fall in that category, and no amount of insurance would replace those that have sentimental value.
I tend to believe that people buy too much insurance. The way I look at it, I only insure those items that would impose too great a financial burden to replace.
My guns don't fall in that category, and no amount of insurance would replace those that have sentimental value.
The NRA coverage is limited to $2500 so a nice gun or two can wipe out that. Added coverage requires serial numbers anyway.
I insure mine with a commercial insurance company for total cost replacement.
Many things can happen to guns. They can be stolen, burn in a fire, warp from heat in a safe during a home fire, the safe can be stolen or a gun can be lost. Insurance is cheap to carry unless you only have 3-4 guns or less in value than the NRA coverage limits.
Ironically a friend had an accident last week in which his car overturned. A S&W 41 mag was in the car. The car has been searched, the site of the accident has been searched and the gun has yet to be located.
I insure mine with a commercial insurance company for total cost replacement.
Many things can happen to guns. They can be stolen, burn in a fire, warp from heat in a safe during a home fire, the safe can be stolen or a gun can be lost. Insurance is cheap to carry unless you only have 3-4 guns or less in value than the NRA coverage limits.
Ironically a friend had an accident last week in which his car overturned. A S&W 41 mag was in the car. The car has been searched, the site of the accident has been searched and the gun has yet to be located.
I would like to hear from someone that successfully had the firearm replaced by insurance. Not a Glock gen 3, but something like a nice older S&W. I could spend more than a grand a year on the NRA insurance. And I wonder if it would wait to see what your home owners policy covered. It seems overly simplified, how would they know what was stolen without the serial number? How would they determine the condition without detailed photos? What happens if it is recovered but has an evidence number engraved into it. What I perceive as real coverage through an insurance company I've heard of, wants pictures, serial numbers, and appraisals on anything out if the ordinary. Even then I would expect to fight quite a bit to get a suitable replacement.
I have never had a theft of guns in my life but it could happen. A friend of mine did about 10 years ago. He is a serious collector and lost eight guns from a gun cabinet. His safe was not touched. The best I can recall, he got about $5,000 for the eight guns. A local attorney lost all his guns in a home burglary and he got $1,000 from the NRA coverage but he failed to have additional insurance that would cover the excess loss.
My insurance company requires the serial number and complete description of all my guns and I have to call in any recently bought guns. Also they get a photo of each gun. I do not have a problem with that since I am not trying to scam an insurance company. Just saying I have a XYZ in caliber .357 does not mean I had such that was stolen. A serial number is listed and turned over to the police in the event of loss. No problem for me. The initial inventory was time consuming but worthwhile in the even of a loss.
If a person pays more than $800 ins premium per year, they have a ton of guns. Firearm coverage usually runs around $8-12 per thousand in cost. I suggest getting actual cost replacement coverage vs a limited value.
Last edited:
No, I do not have any special firearms insurance.
The purpose of insurance is to cover the risk of losing something that you would not be able to afford to replace or could not do without; none of my firearms fall into this category. In the unlikely event I were to lose all or some of my firearms, I am able to replace those that I need. This is not to say that I have more money than others at my disposal; I think most of us here could replace the guns we need if we had to. Meanwhile, because I am "self insured" I can bank what I would be spending on the insurance premiums to prepare for any future losses; or I can spend it on new aquisitions.
I do think it prudent to invest significantly in security measures to protect your firearms, however.
The purpose of insurance is to cover the risk of losing something that you would not be able to afford to replace or could not do without; none of my firearms fall into this category. In the unlikely event I were to lose all or some of my firearms, I am able to replace those that I need. This is not to say that I have more money than others at my disposal; I think most of us here could replace the guns we need if we had to. Meanwhile, because I am "self insured" I can bank what I would be spending on the insurance premiums to prepare for any future losses; or I can spend it on new aquisitions.
I do think it prudent to invest significantly in security measures to protect your firearms, however.
Last edited:
I could not. It has taken me over 45 years of buying several guns each year to get what I have now. Many others here are in the same way.
If one only owns 3-5 guns, then the NRA coverage would likely cover or come close to covering a loss. If one has 10-20 guns, then a total loss might run $10-15,000 and that would hurt to replace.
Past that I feel insurance is required. Remember, premiums are based on replacement value and not actual cash value. At $8 per $1000 in coverage, I think I would insure if I only owned five guns.
It's shockingly easy to run into five digits of replacement value on firearms.
Just a quick sample list:
family heirloom shotgun: $2,000
AR: $1,000
mid-range 1911A1: $800
S&W 27: $750
Remington 870, 2bbl: $600
Remington 700 w/scope: $800.
Six guns, nearly six thousand dollars in replacement value. Last time I went to a meet-up/target shoot I had nearly that much value in a backpack over my shoulder. As I'm sure you can imagine, I didn't let that bag out of my sight all weekend.
Could I afford to replace the guns I need? Yes. One carry gun, one shotgun, one centerfire rifle, and one .22 rifle. I could probably do that for $1,500 or even less with some careful buying of used guns. Thing is, I don't want to be back down to four guns that I need - I want to continue to enjoy the guns that I have spent years acquiring and creating memories with. I don't want to be without my 1911, or a K-frame .38, or my AR, just because I can't afford to replace them.
Insurance is cheap at the price. Last time I looked at the NRA offer it was $1.60 per $100. Ten grand in coverage for less than a case of 9mm? What's stopping you?
Yes that would hurt most of us. But two things:
1. I (and I think most here) would not "need" to replace every gun I (we) own. While each piece provides a lot of satisfaction and pleasure, if I am honest with myself, I could get by with fewer guns than I now own. Yeah it would still hurt to take that loss, but I and my family could still continue. Being able to bear the risk of loss isn't the same as being able to afford to replace the loss. Recognizing that, I am not willing to pay someone else good money to bear a risk I could cover myself (by replacing only those guns I feel I could not do without). I would rather spend some of that money on security measures (good safes, systems, etc.) I can control, to reduce the risk of loss.
2. That $15,000 loss is not certain, and not even probable, and ever less probable if I take smart steps to safeguard my firearms and property. Meanwhile the pain of the insurance premiums I would be paying are certain of themselves--$120 a year at the rate you cited (for $15k coverage). That equates to the certain pain of 1 or 2 guns a decade I cannot buy with that money instead. Double that cost and certain pain at the rate zercool cites above--$240 a year, $2400/decade.
Apart from any financial aspects, if insurance permits easy rest at night, it might be worth it on that merit alone, as long as one understands just what he is paying for.
Anyone who thinks they they could not bear the loss of their guns should insure them.
Last edited:
That comes down to $17.40 per thousand. Cheaper rates can be had and most major insurors will offer rates at half that price.
J.P.60
US Veteran
Our cars, home and my guns are all insured by AAA. The add-on to the homeowners for the guns was $200 per year... but, I do have quite a few. 
eaglebeaver
Member
I know many have NRA (or other) insurance on their guns. What I would like to hear is how well these insurance companies pay off in the event of a loss. eaglebeaver
John Ross
Absent Comrade
I've had three claims in 35 years. All three were paid promptly at full replacement cost. Companies were SAFECO and Firemen's Fund. Regular homeowner's policies with no gun exclusion, replacement cost contents, all risks.
In one of the incidents, one of the guns in question was a Redhawk with a single-digit serial number, a 1980 gift from Tom Ruger. The closest we could find to that gun was a consecutive pair of two-digit Redhawks that J&G Sales had for $10,000. SAFECO asked me if I would accept $5000 for the Redhawk loss. I did.
Back up your claim with pictures and documentation and you'll have no problems with a major carrier and a replacement cost contents, all risks policy.
That information is just wrong.
The maximum limit is $1,000,000.
Serial number are never required.
The first $2,500 coverage is free with NRA membership, anything over that you pay for.
Read the current information:
http://www.locktonaffinity.com/nrains/armscareplus.htm
I have the insurance.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
