An statistical approach like that has the flaw any the most used language would always appear to be at the top of the "most unsafe".

Instead, people should be schooled to write better code. Thats it. Don't let some random new employee with no certifications write safety-critical code. Don't hire people who are under qualified. Its really that easy.

I have no idea, honestly, how you would introduce a use-after-free bug with C++'s smart pointers. Its the lack of schooling, the lack of certification, and the lack of a safety-focused selection of applicants, not a language that you can write bad code in if you ignore all warnings and advice.

Even rust has unsafe{}, but I dont see anyone complain when thats used to introduce safety issues, because "youre not supposed to do that, even though technically you could".

You can have all the safety mechanisms in a language, but you need control, too, and anyone who is completely unqualified will use that to break something.