I agree cyclist should have the freedom to choose to wear a helmet or not, but by that argument,  why do we not have the same freedom to wear a seatbelt or not? The biggest problem with this one sided law was that motorcyclist only have to buy $20k in medical insurance & it is optional. Every other vehicle on our highways has to have unlimited medical coverage (PIP) to be able to purchase their license plates. Why would someone on an open vehicle with no helmet not have to purchase the same?  If a cyclist hits you in your car, YOUR insurance will pay the cyclists medical bills, no matter who is at fault.   Also, it is not enforceable because a proof  of insurance doesn't show whether there is medical insurance or not, so an officer will have no way of knowing they are not in compliance.  Sadly, like too many laws that our legislators pass on both sides of the isle, it was politically motivated, and not all sides of the issue were addressed.  