I'm advocating that we do do investigations, but that we should not automatically make changes to stop the event happening again.
We should look at the effect on the rest of life that any changes will make, and balance that against the likelihood of it happening again and the consequences if it did.
For example.
After the first aircraft in history crashed onto a person on the ground, we could have decided to stop this event ever happening again.
To achieve this we would have to stop all flying. This would be effective, but rather an over-reaction.
If there was an easy change that increased safety without greatly impacting other areas, then of course make the changes.
In flight safety regulations however, the easy miles have already been walked over the last 50 yrs. Every change we now make has miniscule to zero effect on safety yet huge impact on aviation.
This is very plain if you look at the graphs of crashes vs air miles over course of aviation's history. It is a pretty flat line after a steep improvement since the start of flight safety in the bad old 50s/60s.
We seem to have forgotten what it means to accept a 1 in a million chance. That means that once in a while the event will happen.
This is as expected.
This requires no changes.
This means we are operating as intended.
We should accept this!
If we want less than this then why say we accept 1 in a million?