In response to the clipping from Vivienne Walt, USA TODAY posted by Sir Algernon Scruggs, I have to say that having travelled with EL Al, I too, am extremely impressed by their attitude towards security. Given the visible security, I'm even more comforted by the invisible security that PAX (and hopefully the terrorists) never see.
Anyway, my point - the seriousness that the travel industry takes human life in terms of security, transportation design, operating procedures boils down to a calculatable cost. If the cost of intermittent distruption, compensation and damage to brand equity over a defined time period is less than the ongoing costs of incremental (effective) security, equipment redesign etc. then it just won't happen. I know I risk sounding jaundiced, but if government and industry really were interested in reducing the number of fatalities associated with travel, the various recommendations of board of inquiry would be heeded and we would no longer still see:
Roll-on Roll-off ferries - bulk heads would be in place
Fuel tanks filled without nitrogen
Kapton wiring
Poorly validated flight control software necessitating upgrade patches after incidents.
Flight control systems that can be inadvertantly switched through technician error.
The point is all the failure modes associated with such systems are recognised. Some will be addressed, others won't. I don't pretend to know the answer, and I don't mean to knock the accountants - if we want effective security passengers attitudes also need to change.