Ummm, Diatryma, you're not serious surely?
The risk is managed through such concepts as 'following procedures', 'flying the approach as depicted', 'flying above the terrain unless in the circling area'. Using such novel concepts results in 'acceptable risks'.
Have you been to a surgeon recently? These days they list every single possible side effect that has ever been observed or has been predicted to observe before getting you to sign your life away. Do you propose that in future, all passengers must demonstrate their ATPL exam results before being allowed to board so that they are aware of the risks that the pilot is exposed to but have been deemed acceptable?
Oversimplified scaremongering crap such as this article does nothing to inform or prepare passengers for the flight they are about to take. My theory on why air and rail accidents recieve so much coverage is quite simply because the average joe, when boarding, has no idea how to actually drive the plane/train to the desitination and so accepts that responsibility for their safety is no longer in their hands. Apart from the 'there is a very small chance we may crash', there is no intermediate level of knowledge that the punters can have which will let them accurately judge what is going on until you reach, say, an ATPL or equivilent.
UTR.