Helmet laws are universally backed by insurance companies, but not for the reason you might think. Here are the main factors involved:
1. Most, nearly all, car/motorcycle collisions are the fault of the driver.
2. Running over a motorcycle because you can't be bothered to pay attention can be very expensive to your insurance company.
3. The enactment of a helmet law has, in the US, always resulted in a dramatic reduction in the number of motorcycles registered in the state and the number of miles the remaining motorcycles are ridden.
So, the insurance companies are all for helmet laws simply because it deprives their idiot customers of targets, geatly reducing the amount they have to pay out. Naturally, because insurance companies have a lot of money and can afford lobbiests and "campaign contributions", the politicians will find ways to justify such laws. For an example, the CHP reported an 18% reduction in motorcycle related deaths the first year of the CA helmet law. What they didn't tell anyone was that the number of miles ridden was down by some 42 - 48% (depending on which report you read) and the number of deaths *per accident* had increased.
