I don't think that should be in the law. Just give insurance companies the authority to write a policy based on that rule.
In other words, let the insurance company write the policy any way it wants, without government interference.
For example, the insurance company could offer higher-priced insurance for people who don't want to wear helmets.
BTW, one of the arguments against helmet laws is that the helmets make riding more dangerous, thus leading to accidents. Whereas the helmet only helps you if you HAVE an accident.
In principle I agree with you, but the problem is is that the gov't will pick up costs for the uninsured via Medicaid. You'd have to both let the insurance chips fall where they may AND get rid of gov't handouts for the costs not to get passed back to the taxpayer.
LQ, a rider who wears her helmet and, while opposed to helmet laws on principle, realizes that under the current system we'll all end up paying for helmetless accident victims.
I don't entirely buy the argument that helmets cause accidents. I can see much better because my eyes don't water when I wear a helmet. As far as peripheral vision goes, I can actually see better because I am not squinting while zipping along at 90+
:)