That was kind of my point. You speak to type safety and all the issues not having is that would be prevented but memory safety is yet another one and is a huge issue with common platforms TODAY. So, obviously your pet issue isn’t the only one out there and there are trade offs made.

Here's how your "point" landed, according to everyone but you:

Me: "Seat belts are important."

You: "Awfully funny considering our major car accidents these days are mostly all ones with seat belts."

You're implying a nonsensical causation that's purely a correlation.

My point was how our most serious issues are with memory management that exists in popular type-strict languages and so type safety is not up there in importance compared to the biggest causes.

That's exactly backwards. Without the type-safety in those memory-unsafe languages (like C++) there would be 100x more buffer overruns and other memory issues and security holes. Having the type-safety in place is literally the main thing that makes memory-unsafe languages viable.