Should Visors be Mandatory?

Should Visors be Mandatory? 

This has been a problem we've seen numerous times. Player A is by the net. Player B shoots the puck. Puck is deflected off of Player C's stick, hitting Player A square in the face. 

Or maybe Player A is on defense, and decided to dive to block the shot. 

Either way, Player A gets a puck to the face. And this is much more dangerous than you think. 

Last night (March 5th, 2013), Marc Staal was hit in the face with a puck, and fell to the ground kicking in pain. He was able to skate off but did not return to the game. No word on his condition as of now.

Patrick Eaves suffered a broken jaw AND concussion from a puck to the face only  ten games into the 2011-2012 season, and missed the rest of that season.

Stevie Yzerman suffered a puck to the face during playoffs of 2005, requiring almost 5 hours of surgery to repair his eye and making him miss the rest of the postseason. He wore a face shield the next season.

A little different situation in 2000 involved Bryan Berard, playing for the Toronto Maple Leafs, getting hit in the eye with a stick. He missed a full season, and needed to get a contact to get that eye's vision up to 20/400, the league's vision requirement. 

Now, here's the question: Could all these injuries be prevented just by wearing visors? 

I say yes, of course. Visors would make all the difference (except perhaps in certain stick-to-face situations). 

But should they be mandatory?

I again say yes. I understand that players might have difficulty getting used to them if they've never wore one before. But to put comfort above safety is not the answer here. The question players need to ask themselves here is, "Would I rather wear a visor, or would I rather get a puck to the eye and possibly have my career ended?"