Insurance Policy Holder Discriminated Against For Being A Lawful Gun Owner

Eric Reed

A policy holder from the Erie Insurance Company received a notice of cancellation for owning a firearm. After this photo began circulating the internet, I became suspicious of it being legit, because it’s hard to believe that an insurance company would risk a potential discrimination issue by taking such an extreme measure.

Insurance Policy Holder Discriminated Against For Being A Lawful Gun Owner

I contacted Erie Insurance and received a return call from Karen Kraus Phillips from their PR Department. I identified myself as a journalist with, and questioned her about the photograph. She did confirm its validity, and offered to email me an official Erie Insurance statement. Their response is below.

“We can appreciate how passionately people feel about the Second Amendment. This issue, however, regards insurance underwriting. While we can’t give details about a specific customer, we can tell you that we do provide firearms coverage, both liability and property, under our Homeowners and Business policies. When we write a Business policy, we ask customers to disclose whether or not they keep firearms on the premises so we can accurately evaluate the full range of the risk it may represent.”

I asked her if police officers risk cancellation or pay higher rates for owning firearms as well. They declined any further comment or contact.

So I have a few major problems with their official statement. They’re alleging that firearms increase risk, but they fail to include any factual data to indicate that. Secondly, they won’t comment if police officers pay higher rates. What about military members, veterans, or competition/tactical shooters, many of which have equal or superior training to most police departments. This is a simple case of a NY insurance company discriminating against the “demonized” object referred to as a gun. I’m Eric Reed, and may God bless America.

4 Responses

  1. 5WarVeteran says:

    Just what I have come to expect from Jew York.

  2. aaronson2 says:

    I’m a firm supporter of 2nd Amendment rights. That said, in a free market, a company should be at liberty to choose its clients and do business (or not) with whomever it wishes, just as anyone looking to purchase a service or product should be free to choose among willing providers. There should be no coercion on either side of the transaction. If I had a policy with that company I’d be happy to take my business elsewhere and deal with people who share my values.

  3. Jeff Lee says:

    Close to twenty years ago, a bossy female insurance agent near Chapin, SC canceled the homeowner’s policy of a State Farm Customer who had the audacity to set up a shooting range on his very rural piece of property. Her actions led many State Farm customers, including myself, to cancel their policies. As a gun owner, I was not going to pay premiums to a company that had no more respect for me (or him) than that. It was hilarious, the number of SF agents who were scrambling to do damage control in the wake of her seriously misguided actions. Even today, I laugh when I see NRA stickers prominently displayed on the doors and front windows of State Farm agents in SC, which I know are related to the fallout from her bad decision , almost two decades ago.

  4. None Your Business says:

    People, CANCEL your policy!
    Don’t put up with this garbage.

Leave a Reply

© 2014 Pakalert Press. All rights reserved.