'Murder insurance': NRA to face hearing on controversial program

The gun-rights group must face questions about whether it violated New York law in marketing the 'Carry Guard' insurance product.

Pistols and revolvers sit on display in the Smith & Wesson Corp. booth during the National Rifle Association (NRA) annual meeting in Dallas, Texas, on May 5, 2018. (Photo: Bloomberg)

For more than two years, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and New York state regulators have been embroiled in a dispute over the NRA-endorsed “Carry Guard” insurance program that critics have dubbed as “murder insurance.” Now, the association must appear before a regulatory hearing over allegations it violated New York law in the marketing of the product, Bloomberg reported.

The DFS investigation

An investigation by New York’s Department of Financial Services (DFS) in 2018 found that the NRA “unlawfully provided liability coverage to gun owners in the event they were charged with a crime involving their firearms.” The DFS investigation also found that the NRA actively advertised the product in the state despite not having a license to conduct insurance business.

Lockton, the program’s administrator, issued 680 Carry Guard policies and collected $12 million in premium between April and November 2017, said the DFS. The broker was subsequently fined $7 million following the investigation and discontinued the program after the Parkland mass shooting.

The NRA sued in 2018 over the enforcement action, claiming it was the victim of a political vendetta by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, according to Bloomberg. Lockton also was slammed with a lawsuit that alleged breach of contract from the firearms lobbying group.

Upcoming hearing

On July 13, a federal judge in Albany, N.Y., denied the NRA’s request to block its July 29 hearing before the DFS. The gun-rights group attempted to postpone the hearing until its lawsuit with the DFS concluded.

“The subject matter of the administrative hearing is to determine whether the NRA violated the insurance law, not whether defendants retaliated against the NRA for its speech or whether Superintendent Vullo selectively enforced the Insurance Law against the NRA’s affinity-insurance programs,” said U.S. District Judge Thomas McAvoy.

Related: