eternaltransit

Like everything in the real world, rather than thought experiments of the internet, there is the tradeoff between ensuring maximum rigidity of process and control, and usability.

For instance, we could put breathalysers in cars to test before you start the engine, or make mobile telephones become disabled when travelling at speed to stop people using them when driving.

We could force people to strip naked at airports and to have their luggage searched individually to stop banned goods from getting on planes - after all, in 2015 the TSA failed 95% of its tests to detect explosives and weapons, so there's scope for improvement there.

But we don't, because the inefficiency that causes and the inconvenience to all users isn't outweighed by the incremental benefits it gives.

Every time you are exposed to something you aren't in control - whether that's transiting IST during an attack, stepping outside your house and walking along the road where people driving past might be crazy/under the influence/driving poorly maintained cars - you are taking a calculated risk.

You obviously feel that positive passenger bag match is a requirement for your travels as a necessary security precaution. Airlines, who incorporate threat and security planning into their operations - not least if they want to get a licence to fly to many places in the world - do not feel this is necessary and think their current procedures are adequate, given the risk/probability tradeoff.

Since most (all?) airlines have a similar policy - groups are tagged to the group, represented by one traveller - I would say that air travel is probably not for you.