Sounds like a pretty slippery slope, especially because there is zero motivation to inflict those type of punitive laws on drivers. Who determines if a helmet "would" have prevented an injury vs "might" have prevented an injury? What constitutes "basic safety equipment"? And if you are injured to any part not or insufficiently, protected, should you then be solely liable for that? Ankle crushed and you aren't wearing armored boots? Sorry, no insurance coverage for you! And why limit it to equipment but not training? What should we make mandatory there? Taking a basic MSF course? Taking a refresher every year, every 5, every 10? Taking an advanced class?