What, like the last 40 years? I think this is one thing that tipped some people in favour for Leave; it was for me.
If we could have voted for no more change, everything staying the same, then I would probably agree just because of human nature more than anything else. But history shows this hasn't, and almost certainly, will not be the case. And
when the EU makes little changes here and there, and we don't get the vote, it just builds up more resentment amongst the public (via the media and probably politicians themselves). I know people mentioned the referendums that a couple of countries had for the Lisbon treaty (Denmark and Netherlands?), but I haven't researched into the exact implications of the results, so apologies for the generalisation here: I think those countries voted against it and I believe won some concessions, but it wasn't exactly an "options" list for which parts of the EU you can or can't agree to (for better or for worse). If there was a fairly big change in the future, and we did vote against it, it may be that Leave would "win" and we end up here again anyway.
I also think that it is obviously a lot easier to see the some of the flaws of the results of Leave now, but it would be 5-10 years down the line before you could start to point out some of the flaws of the possible long term effects of the campaigns (EU army, Turkey joining for better or for worse etc.). By then, any information about these will be in hind-sight and I am sure people now would say that didn't see it coming, and others will say "the signs were here". I fully expect some of these posts in these referendum threads to get quoted in a few years' time with "Told you so!"