Should Life Insurance Policies Be Banned?

It's fair to wonder how many people would still be alive today if there were never any such thing as a life insurance policy. Personally I can't imagine NOT having a life insurance policy if you have children 17 and under. But the below info might ring true for some of you.

An insurance policy may be the only thing it takes to kick a murder plan into high gear. A woman who isn't generally capable of murder just because she saw him with another woman might be to get her hands on that $300,000 payout.

Which brings us back to the initial question: How many people would still be with us had they not named their killer as the beneficiary of a life insurance policy?

Who in their right mind keeps an angry, disgruntled family member as the beneficiary anyways?

You'd be stunned to know the answer: Enough to supply the Investigation Discovery channel with one crime documentary after another in which a person was murdered for their life insurance policy.

• In many cases the killer is a woman - either directly, or she "hires" someone to do the job.
• Of course, many times the victim is a woman.
• A third scenario is when a non-family member has been scammed by the killer to name the killer as the sole beneficiary.
• A fourth scenario is when the killer takes out the policy of the victim without the victim knowing!

This article is about the first two types.

What's absolutely mind-blowing is why the policyholder keeps these beneficiaries on the payout plan, when any one of the following has occurred:

• The beneficiary and the policyholder have separated or divorced - and have a very ugly relationship in which the beneficiary has displayed fits of rage.
• The policyholder is afraid of the beneficiary, though there's been no violence directed towards him or her.
• The policyholder has been assaulted by the beneficiary.
• There are no children (which then begs the question more than ever of why the policyholder would want that ex-spouse or soon-to-be ex-spouse still as a beneficiary).

In short, why on earth would you want someone - whom you're either afraid of or now hate to the bone - to be your beneficiary?

Even if you have young children with the beneficiary…it still makes zero sense if you believe there's even a remote chance that your ex is capable of killing you for that money.

Your raging ex or deeply troubled son do NOT need $800,000 if you die in a car accident or from disease. So why do you have the policy and why are they on it?

Bottom Line

• Nobody whom you fear or who now hates you should be your beneficiary.
• Remove them at once and inform them promptly.
• It could save your life.