- Jan 28, 2013
- 55
- 0
Not sure what your point you are trying to make. Driving is motor vehicle in a typhoon in Taiwan is a pretty simple and specific action. You would be hard pressed to provide a similar definition of what constitutes a "fielders mask".
It is easy for the insurance industry (or the government in the example I gave) to say all insurance is voided if you don't do X or do Y. They do that for certain riskier than normal activities already (some do so for scuba diving for example). Defining that facial injuries are not covered if you weren't wearing facial protection without defining that protection would be easy.
They don't say you can't do X or Y, but if you do, then it is on you. The insurers are within their rights to add this waiver along withal of the other ones they have.
I'm not saying anything one way or the other on this issue since I think it is up to the individual, but do you think more people would wear some form of mask if they had no medical coverage?
Just wondering.