There are valid selling points to rust's safety features, but this just feels like "I use rust because I need my compiler to be my training wheels". More of a self-own than anything.
If I hired someone to paint my wall and they were saying "I'm not going to use any protection against splatters on the ground because I am that good and don't need training wheels", I would find that behavior very unprofessional and wouldn't want that person anywhere close to my wall.
I'm writing professional software I'll take any help from tooling that is available without compromising other aspects like performance. It also helps that Rust is much more productive than C++ overall.
About the self-own, my teams over the years lauded my low bug rate, be it in C++ or in Rust. I have a knack for correctness, hence why I prefer languages that make strong guarantees about it by construction to languages where I need to remember and regurgitate thousands of rules at every corner
You're looking at a list of less than two dozen CVEs over several years across the Rust standard library and tooling. There are no CVEs raised for the analogous C++ behaviour, it's just accepted as normal.
Only if there's a lot of programmers that don't need them.
There's roughly zero of those programmers. And you're not one of them.