https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_Sprengstoffanschl%C3...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_the_London_Undergro... [2] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/09/throwing-it-a...
I believe one or both of these bombs explains why lockers were removed in NYC (and this may have led to other places removing them too).
[0] https://observer.com/2016/01/why-hasnt-washington-explained-...
The UK does reasonably well at "hidden" security features. Another type are "decorative" features -- like the word "Arsenal" outside the football club, or the ponds in front of the Scottish Parliament building -- which just happen to be in the right place and of the right strength to prevent vehicles crashing through.
Alas I cannot answer your question really, if regular old “drop a bomb in me and nobody will notice” bins are common in your locale it seems safe to assume that public lockers have not been removed due to safety concerns. If I had to guess I’d say they were not utilised/profitable.
The "efficient market in lockers" theory is not a null hypothesis. ITT, we haven't eliminated the "because homeless people use them" explanation for the widespread lack of public lockers.
Terrorists tend to strike a major targets, so you’ll definitely find a difference in security measure between downtown Chicago and say Peoria.
The idea was to reduce the number of hiding/storing places for bombs and weapons.
Was the whole idea of public lockers at transport terminals just poetic license?
They may very well have been common at one point in train stations when people traveled that way more.
I also suspect though that, to the degree lockers were useful as a plot detail, they were possibly created when they weren't actually that common.
I know the Stockholm airport still has locker rentals.