For those who have given a genuine vote that the current aviation safety standards are “clear and concise”, I genuinely fret for you.
For those who’ve compared other complex legislative regimes with those of the aviation regulatory regime, I’d like to know what those other regimes are. There are, of course, many complex legislative regimes, but I’m not aware of any that have two sets of regulations spaced over a decade that have no coherent or logical explanation as to why one subject matter is dealt with in one set of regulations than the other (because the explanation is that there is no coherent or logical explanation other than incompetence), the amalgamation of which does not provide a complete insight into what the rules are, because the only way to obtain a complete insight is to refer to thousands of pages of CAOs, exemptions, directions, approvals, permissions, manuals of standards and other forests of paper.
I’d also note that the existence of other, more complex, regulatory regimes may be an indication of a systemic malaise rather than a reasonable excuse for the complexity of the aviation regulatory regime. The empty rhetoric of governments is simplification; the actions are ever-more complexity.