Well, I'm pretty new here, but I'll weigh in on the helmet law stuff -
The problem with not having helmet laws is that people want their freedoms but *not* the responsibility that goes with it.
In my field, I see people all the time with head injuries after motorcycle accidents (Wyoming has no helmet law). Guess what? A huge number of them are on Medicaid, many unable to work afterwards, some just simply stiffed the hospital for their $200,000 in direct medical costs which included 2 weeks in the ICU and 3 weeks in the Rehab unit, along with long-term outpatient therapy. So who's responsible for their "freedom" - you and me. WE pay for it.
I'd be all for the freedom aspect of not having helmet laws if those who chose not to wear helmets had to 1) post a $1 million bond against their direct and indirect costs to society when they get their head injury, or 2) had to show enough assets to pay for themselves, rather than dump the bill on the taxpayers, or 3) carried an advance directive card that they demand no medical/rehab/etc. services in the case of a head injury (still doesn't solve the problem of their long-term cost to society when they can't work and go on state support for the rest of their lives, or 4) some other remedy I haven't though of yet
Also, we who wear helmets of course pay for those who don't with our insurance premiums too, and that's not fair. How about tiered insurance at the least with the higher premiums for those who don't wear a helmet?
But to demand your freedom and have the other insureds or the taxpayers pick up your tab when you crack your head open is hypocritical BS.
End of rant.