The vast majority in Class B airspace or on defined VFR routes.
Bloggsie,
Completely incorrect.
I suggest you get a Los Angeles/SoCal chart covering the lower levels of the Los Angeles basin.
The first thing you will find is how SMALL the low level KLAX B actually is, or put another way, how close you can be to KLAX and be in E airspace.
The VFR lanes represent only a very small proportion of the traffic. Almost all that a passenger would see, particularly at night, where aircraft lights are more visible, will be operating in E.
I support the comments of others, I hope you have the courage of your convictions, and decline to ever fly in US E (or any other E throughout the world) airspace. You couldn't permit family and friends to face such risks, could you, unless you are a complete hypocrite?? And never go anywhere near India.
As for "safe" being "slippery", you know as well as I do, or you should know, that "safe/safer/safety" is meaningless, emotional, dimensionless and of no use in practical management, and why all relevant national/international standards are for "risk management".
You know, or should know, that "risk" is never zero, but the statistical equivalent "vanishingly small" is a risk so low that for all intents and purposes, it is zero.
You know, or you should know, that all ICAO CNS/ATM principles are base on a minimum separation assurance standard, or, in "popular terms" ALL AIRSPACE is equally "safe" ---- all increasing CNS/ATM services input does is enable the handling of increasing traffic levels, while maintaining the design separation assurance standard.
But perhaps this is all too much to ask of you??
Tootle pip!!