Paul Weigand of Kansas argued with the court that the state statute requiring people to wear seat belts while riding in a car didn't specifically assert that the seat belt (not pictured) had to be attached to the vehicle in question:
An officer ticketed Paul Weigand during a winter traffic stop after making him get out of his car to prove the belt wasn’t connected to the vehicle. Weigand says he is terrified of becoming trapped in a burning vehicle. Plus, he says the law doesn’t specify that the seat belt has to be attached to his vehicle.
The judge disagreed and levied him a fine and court costs.
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/02/10/2646775/kansas-judge-says-homemade-seat.html?story_link=email_msg# via Lowering the Bar | Photo (unrelated) via Instructables
They could choose to drive without insurance. For that matter, why should we force people to get a license to drive?
People don't choose to wear seatbelts for the stupidest and obscurest of reasons. You're far more likely to be thrown from a car without your seatbelt than to be trapped underwater and not able to get your seatbelt off in time.
And, actually, all one needs to avoid having to wear one is a vehicle manufactured prior to what, 1978? Something like that.
The NYT had an article about bicycle riders where cars travel several inches closer to riders who are wearing helmets. The theory being that drivers see you wearing a helmet and it makes them feel safer driving next to you. So while you might be worse off during a crash without one, wearing a helmet might make you more likely to crash. I'd bet a similar phenomena exist with motorbike riders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10bike.html?ex=1323406800&en=6cfbd84196d71abc&ei=5090
Back when I had a bike I never wore a helmet, I t-boned a car, went over the roof and performed an awesome tuck and roll. No injuries other than a little road rash on my shoulder. Doesn't mean you shouldn't wear one but helmets also aren't cure-alls.
I would say that this does not meet the definition as outlined in the previous comment since it's not "properly" fashioned, according to any legitimate safety standards.
Just like helmet laws. I know bikers who actually think you're better protected if you get in an accident and you're not wearing a helmet, because if you hit something helmet-on, you could somehow injure your spine. They don't bother to consider if you hit something head-on without a helmet, you're having a closed casket for sure.