Two can play this game: Maybe their license to do business in Kansas needs a review.
well, they got it bass ackwards, the risk is higher when the teachers don’t have guns
I wonder how these insurers are going to handle the liability claims for schools who refuse to protect their students - I would think that the potential for fiduciary loss would be much greater.
If this is the non-issue that it should be, then somewhere there has got to be a firm that not only would do this but would offer a discount for it.
What part of “concealed” is so hard to understand?
OK, let's take them at their word for a minute. If a situation arises where it can later be shown that their no-guns-for-teachers policy CONTRIBUTED to the carnage, are they willing to pay out more and also to get sued for wrongful death over the policy?
Fine. Schools should self-insure. When someone has a legitimate claim, the school should pay it without going to court. When someone has a frivolous claim, the school should fight it for decades, until the parasite is dead of old age, while pointing out to potential jurors that rewarding the greedy claimant will merely raise taxes on their neighbors and reduce funding for the school’s real work.
If EMC Insurance Companies get away with such a restriction, which gives aid and comfort to the enemy, then the next step for hate-America insurance companies, like EMC, is to refuse to insure homes in which the homeowners exercise their second amendment rights.
One wonders if there is leftist political pressure being applied to insurance companies in Kansas or elsewhere.
It actually shows that insurance underwriters are by their nature a conservative bunch and don't like to assume risks. It also shows why it pays to shop around for insurance -- car insurance, life insurance, health insurance -- and school liability insurance. I'm unaware of any insurance company that found itself in trouble because of liberal underwriting policies. It's usually investing assets in areas where they are clueless that is the financial risk and gets insurance companies into trouble.
The names, pictures and political affiliations of the majority stockholders, directors, officers and managers of the companies in question should be immediately published. Interesting patterns will develop if this policy is implemented.
One of the factors is what I call specialty insurance coverages. It’s difficult to find companies to write certain coverages. For example there are exactly two insurers that will underwrite for fire departments in West Virginia. If there are only three companies that will insure schools in Kansas, that makes it difficult to apply armstrong tactics like taking your business elsewhere.
Insurance companies are notoriously risk adverse. If the risk can’t be quanitified at an acceptible level by their actuaries, they won’t include the risk under the coverages.
I’m not excusing them. It’s just that there aren’t many options other than deputizing the teachers. That raises the bar significantly for defending a school.
easy,
then they can not do business in the state FOR ANY INSURANCE.
This is odd given that armed teachers would LOWER liability.
Pass law allowing school to waive coverage for armed teachers using weapons.