Ha - well don't read in too many "personal inferences." I've only needed one BFR so I'm a newer pilot. It was ridiculously easy and I'm personally very current. For goodness sakes I spend my free time reading a safety section on an airline board and I am absolutely a fanatic about safety. It's not a personal thing for me.

My point is that everything is a hassle versus reward. Sure, making a bunch of hoops to jump through or "courses" with longer tests than a BFR ultimately may increase safety, perhaps we could get to 4 or 5 per 100,000. This would be advertised as a 50% reduction in GA accidents!

I'm still against it. Why? Because you inconvenience the innumerable people that DON'T need this government hand-holding.

We could put a dent in the 35,000 car deaths per year by increasing DL requirements. I AM in favor of this, because the DL requirements are right now so minimal and there is no currency. However, it is not done because of cost. With millions of drivers even spending a few more dollars per driver becomes wildly expensive.

GA is quite safe, and the bad pilots will need a LOT of help and attitude adjustment to stop being bad pilots. So, while you can worry about me because I may feel I "don't need it", it is mainly because the GA accident rate is already relatively low, and the requirements and hassle is already relatively high, and the remedy to increased training would at best be very costly and inefficient. We are not ferrying the public around, so it is simply less of a concern.

As a parallel example, during my training I did spin training, and this is not required. Although I feel it was helpful, I'm not an advocate of the FAA returning to requiring it for private pilot. Why? Mostly time / money / airplane availability, and the amount of safety such training adds is present, but relatively low in the large scheme of things. Interested people can still seek that stuff out if they want to become excellent pilots.