"safer" still isn't as safe as any system that can get people around without expecting 90% of those (driving-age) people to spend most of their travel time behind the steering wheel of 2 ton machinery at an average speed of 45mph/70kph, over roads that we paved over cities to build and kneecap future progress to maintain, bound by a necessarily authoritarian system to ensure any amount of safety in doing so.

In fact, the industry had to push a lot of propaganda and laws through anti-democratic methods to a) shift away all blame away from the people making and selling the cars and actively destroying all other means of transport, b) make roads as "safe" and convenient as they are despite still being hostile to all road users other than cars, for you to c) be here in a community literally called fuckcars talking like any number of road deaths is a normal and good thing, actually.

You can read about the propaganda and other methods used here in section 1.5 if you actually care to learn at all. Highly recommend reading the rest while you're at it too. Genuinely good and compelling read. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7325856/#s0030title

People got around before cars, they still get around without cars in many places, and fewer cars on the road means less traffic and fewer road deaths. Car-centric infrastructure is expensive to maintain, encourages blight, kills small business, and discourages community engagement. People and businesses and communities alike thrive when infrastructure prioritizes pedestrian transport. There needs to be more alternatives to driving, especially in high density areas; where people go out to eat, drink, and be merry; so nobody has to put themselves and others in danger just to get from a to b.