> the cost of design and implementation on such large scale of tens of thousands of planes, outweighs any outcry caused by few crashes that occur per year Or i

> the cost of design and implementation on such large scale of tens of thousands of planes, outweighs any outcry caused by few crashes that occur per year Or it would remove money from where it could be better spent. There are some light aircraft (such as some experimental ultralights) that do have parachutes. Frankly, I'd prefer to fly in an airliner or other planes that don't have such warning bells and red flags all over. Here's an example: What would the effect be if all passengers who board a plane or cruiseliner were required to wear life jackets before take off just in case of the remote chance of needing to face a disaster over water? And a possibly more controversial example: Helmets and bullet vests can save some lives. At what point should the focus be on legislating on their mandatory use, versus fixing the problems at the source? I'd class parachutes, helmets and bullet vets as PPE in the chart over here - resources and attention is always finite even before we get into the topic of freedom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls