I really didn't know where to put this general question so maybe a moderator can help direct me.

I am looking for any general advice for potential insurance on my firearms. Homeowner's policy only covers about 2500 in value for firearms and my collection is well beyond that. Does anyone have any rec's for good insurance for their firearm collection?
Thank you for your help.

The NRA offers insurance for firearms.

Don't give up on homeowners insurance. My homeowner's insurance coverage from AAA Auto has similar low standard coverage on guns and jewelry. But I bought special rider coverage on my firearms and accessories for a very reasonable rate. They are insured for full replacement value for fire, theft, loss while hunting, etc. Cost me $105 for $15,000 of coverage.

this is something i have not done yet, but have talked to my state farm agent about. and as ramhunter said, i will get special riders for them. i have a rider for our $3k nikon camera. i forget the cost but it was very cheap for a year. i am moving in 3 weeks, once we get into the house with the new policy, i will take inventory of my guns and the wife's jewelry and have riders for them.

I had a $16,000 rider on my Farmers homeowners insurance (which pays only $1,000 for firearms loss) when burglars stole 35 rifles and shotguns from me a few years ago.

Unfortunately, I didn't increase the amount to compensate for an increase in value or the purchase of more guns over the 15-20 years after buying the rider. Even Farmers' adjuster said my stolen guns were worth more than $42,000.

The check I received was $17,000 -- $16,000 for the rider and $1,000 from the homeowners policy.

The moral of this story is this: review what you have regularly and check what gun values are doing.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
I had a $16,000 rider on my Farmers homeowners insurance (which pays only $1,000 for firearms loss) when burglars stole 35 rifles and shotguns from me a few years ago.

Unfortunately, I didn't increase the amount to compensate for an increase in value or the purchase of more guns over the 15-20 years after buying the rider. Even Farmers' adjuster said my stolen guns were worth more than $42,000.

The check I received was $17,000 -- $16,000 for the rider and $1,000 from the homeowners policy.

The moral of this story is this: review what you have regularly and check what gun values are doing.

Bill Quimby

Bill,
Were those in a safe???

Get the rider on the homeowners. I have American Family. They needed the list of firearms covered and if I have any info on the purchase date and price. I update my spreadsheet as necessary.

I have Farm Bureau.

They charge me an extra $300 on my Homeowners a year for $75,000 on firearms. A bargain, these days.

This is the ticket IMO. Worldwide coverage, very affordable.

http://www.siai.net/

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
I had a $16,000 rider on my Farmers homeowners insurance (which pays only $1,000 for firearms loss) when burglars stole 35 rifles and shotguns from me a few years ago.

Unfortunately, I didn't increase the amount to compensate for an increase in value or the purchase of more guns over the 15-20 years after buying the rider. Even Farmers' adjuster said my stolen guns were worth more than $42,000.

The check I received was $17,000 -- $16,000 for the rider and $1,000 from the homeowners policy.

The moral of this story is this: review what you have regularly and check what gun values are doing.

Bill Quimby

Bill,
Were those in a safe???

No, a hidden cabinet.

A friend had a safe full of guns stolen. Burglars used a floor jack to pull the safe's bolts out of the concrete slab, and a dolly to load it into their truck. The safe was in his garage so they worked undetected.

"Our" burglars acted like landscapers, using my tools to cut and stack vegetation while two broke a kitchen window and went straight to my guns. We'd had a fire three years earlier, with lots of workmen walking through my trophy room and I suspect one of them "cased" our place then.

Bill Quimby

I had 3 rifles stolen just over 2 years ago

My NRA membership covered ZERO

My homeowners topped out at 2k

Luckily optics, bases and rings are NOT a firearm and fell under my household replacement coverage otherwise I would have been upside down

I would like to thank the NRA for the insurance coverage.......hmmm

Thank you everyone for your input.
DJS

Ted Why did the NRA decide not to pay you any claim ?

After several emails and telephone calls the final decision from the NRA was that I had "adequate homeowners coverage" for my lose already

I recommend you contact Tim Hartsock of Core-Vens Insurance. Phone number 563 242 5423.
They specialize in firearms insurance. They had a booth at DSC.

In the late 80's my wife and I made our 1st trip to Zim. My Home Owners would not write a rider to cover my rifles, The NRA policy at the time would only cover them in the US or IN US protectorate. At that time in the pre internet era I could not find a company to cover our gear.

2 classic rifles went missing on the way to Zim. They were later recovered in the Customs Office in London. The snafu occurred in the transfer onto a BA flight to Zim. It required calling London almost everyday for 3 solid months and then finally hiring James Pedder to find them. It took him only 45 minutes to do so. Then BA "misplaced them again for the return flight back to me In Denver. It was quite the circus. A client of mine had a Legend go missing on flight to Namibia not long ago. He received about $3000 as compensation from his home owners and the airlines.

I'd do what I could to cover your guns to the best extent that your wallet will allow.

Bill:

Did you have an alarm system in your house? Was this in Tucson or your cabin? I have heard crime in Tucson is out of control.

USAA will also sell you a rider for special items, assuming you are a USAA member. I can't say enough about USAA.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Bill:

Did you have an alarm system in your house? Was this in Tucson or your cabin? I have heard crime in Tucson is out of control.

At our winter home in Tucson in the middle of the day. No alarm. The neighbors watched as two men and a woman drove up in an old pickup truck and parked next to my trophy room. One man began trimming our palo verdes and palms (with my tools and wheelbarrow, which they took when they left) and stacking the cuttings along our driveway.

They didn't see the other man and woman go to the back of the house, break down our grapestake fence and kitchen window and climb inside.

They apparently went straight to the hidden cabinet and used a reciprocating saw to cut the hasp and get to my guns.

We'd had an electrical fire in a bedroom three or four years earlier and lots of workmen were in our home for a couple of weeks. My guess is that one of them saw my trophies, figured there were guns somewhere, and found the cabinet and waited a couple of years before coming back.

There were a bunch of similar burglaries in the foothills above Tucson for several months back then, and ours was one of the homes targeted. I've heard the Phoenix complex is a lot worse for crime, especially violent crime.

Bill Quimby

I see Jim Shockey lost a bunch of guns in a burglary. A good reason to be anon on the internet...

I've gone to Farm Bureau for auto and H/O. Half the premium and double the coverages it seems.

While I was laid up 13 weeks in the hosp & N/H around $14,000 worth of my toys disappeared. They paid around $11,000, the discounted amount was charged off to depreciation.

I've had quite a few claims since being with them and they've paid right off no problem so far.

Do yourself a favor and compare what you've got now and costs to what the state Farm Bureau would be. I think you'll be real surprised.

George

quote:

They paid around $11,000, the discounted amount was charged off to depreciation.

Yes, a favorite trick of insurance companies. An acquaintance had six rather ordinary guns stolen and asked my dealer friend for an evaluation for the insurance claim. The dealer gave him a very straight-forward estimate of the "shelf" value of each gun, which he forwarded to the insurance company.

The insurance company determined that, despite the dealer's affidavit, the guns were all 15 or more years old and therefore had a depreciated value of zero! Yep, refused to pay him zip.

I wonder if the thieves realized that the guns were worthless when they stole them?

quote:

I am looking for any general advice for potential insurance on my firearms. Homeowner's policy only covers about 2500 in value for firearms and my collection is well beyond that.

Perhaps you need insurance, but many, if not most owners of a large number of somewhat expensive firearms do not. You should first review your financial situation before spending any significant sum on additional insurance.

Fundamentally, insurance is designed to socialize the types of losses which an individual cannot personally stand to absorb. The insurance premium represents the overall losses anticipated by the class of insureds, plus overhead administrative costs, plus commission costs of the sales person, plus an investment return for the insurer. The admin, commission, and investment portion of the premium varies from a low of about 20% to a high of as much as 80% and even more. So, by purchasing insurance you are assuring a smaller financial loss in order to offset a potential much larger financial loss.

But if the loss of your firearms collection (or a portion of it) would not represent a financial set back from which you could not reasonably recover (meaning that you would no longer be able to meet your various financial obligations and continue to live at your current level of affluence), then it is really an unwise financial decision to purchase additional insurance on your firearms.

Only you can make the decision as to whether you fall in to the category which can absorb such a financial loss, or the category which cannot. But I would suggest that as with any non-essential item(s) you might elect to own (speedboat, art, jewelry, etc.), if you can't afford to lose it, then it's wisest not to own it.

Besides, some, or many, of the firearms you own may have very special sentimental value. You can't insure that, and no amount of money can repurchase lost sentimental value. In other words, you can only insure financial value, and all other value is ultimately at risk regardless.

Stonecreek:

You're saying that if losing $42,000 worth of guns didn't affect our standard of living (it didn't), increasing our insurance rider to cover the full value of my guns would have would have been unwise financially?

I seriously doubt that. Although it was not the end of the world, the burglary would have been easier to accept if the insurance company had paid me the full value of my guns instead of just $17,000.

Not insuring my guns for their full value was a mistake. Not insuring them at all would have been an even bigger one.

Another Arizona Outdoor Writer:

Firearms theft is a common occupational risk for those in our profession. (Just ask Craig Boddington. He was hit twice.)

I knew that, and I should have raised our coverage as I acquired more guns and as those I already owned appreciated in value, and I didn't.

I also shouldn't have kept them all in one location.

Bill Quimby

quote:

You're saying that if losing $42,000 worth of guns didn't affect our standard of living (it didn't), increasing our insurance rider to cover the full value of my guns would have would have been unwise financially?

Yes, statistically that is correct.

However, assuring some amount of loss in order to offset a larger amount of loss may provide you with an intangible sense of security. You are the only one who can say what that is worth to you, but simple arithmetic will tell you what the financial value of insurance is on average. The fact that no one is average and no one's financial situation or personal level of anxiety is identical to any other person's means that what, whether, and how much insurance you should buy is a strictly personal decision. My point is that people often make such a decision without fully evaluating the full financial picture.

Sorry, but I remain convinced:

1. I should have raised our coverage as I acquired more guns and as those I already owned appreciated in value.

2. Not insuring my guns for their full value was a mistake.

3. Not insuring them at all would have been an even bigger mistake.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
Sorry, but I remain convinced:

1. I should have raised our coverage as I acquired more guns and as those I already owned appreciated in value.

2. Not insuring my guns for their full value was a mistake.

3. Not insuring them at all would have been an even bigger mistake.

Bill Quimby

I would agree with Bill on this one; if one of my rental properties burns down the loss of rent will not affect my standard of living, but it will have some impact on my net worth.

We also have rental properties, our home and a cabin.

A fire at any one of these houses and townhomes probably would not affect our net worth much because we review our coverage with our insurance agent on a regular basis.

I wish I'd done the same with my firearms rider.

Bill Quimby

quote:

I would agree with Bill on this one; if one of my rental properties burns down the loss of rent will not affect my standard of living, but it will have some impact on my net worth.

But, of course, that is exactly Stonecreek's point. What difference does you net worth make if it is unimportant to maintaining your lifestyle?

If you can stand the loss, the insurance is not a good expenditure of your finances, since you are obviously paying not only for the value of the actual risk but for the overhead, profit, agents commission, etc that the insurance company charges. Self insuring is, in many cases, a far better financial proposition. Just for one example, I had a building I owned, and the smaller insurance companies decided to no longer offer liability insurance for it. The premiums went from about 3K/year to 12K/year. I elected to self insure, which I did for about 15 years until I sold the building. Obviously I was taking a risk, but I felt the premiums were far more expensive than the risks. Could have gone the other way, but it didn't. The same can be said for most medical insurance, except for the 3 levels of pricing the medical industry uses to fuck individuals who are self insured.

As Stonecreek said, if you can stand the loss, insurance is usually a bad bet but many people can't stand the loss, either financially or mentally.

quote:

As Stonecreek said, if you can stand the loss, insurance is usually a bad bet but many people can't stand the loss, either financially or mentally.

Guess I'm not wealthy enough. Although losing my guns did not break me financially or mentally, for me, the cost of insurance is a small price to pay for a hedge against the possible loss of things I own.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Although losing my guns did not break me financially or mentally, for me, the cost of insurance is a small price to pay for a hedge against the possible loss of things I own

That's fine. As I said, only you can determine whether the premium is worth the protection. In your case you stipulate that it is not worth it in a finite financial sense, but you regard it as "a small price to pay for a hedge". What you've just described is paying for peace of mind. Regardless of whether the decision to purchase insurance is a sound financial decision, you've decided that it is well worth the peace of mind it gives you. I can't and won't argue with that.

Safeco does not have a limit on loss to guns by theft, at least in Colorado.

Safeco also has a private fire fighting company on retainer in the event of a declared wildfire. This may not appeal to a city dweller, but can be of interest to a rural homeowner.

Different States may have different coverages.

Some carriers include a guns attachments such as scope, rings, bases, sling, etc. in the value of the gun.