I don't buy it. We have already learned empirically that "fix your bugs" (or, better, "don't write bugs in the guest place") is a failed solution to memory safety.
Of course, this argument is silly. The absolute number of knives are used safely and without issue in the overwhelming majority of cases.
Yes, there are times when someone was sloppy and sliced open their hand, but that doesn't make vigilance a failed solution to tool safety. The accidents that occur with them are in the realm of tolerable risk.
C is fundamentally no different. The simplicity comes with footguns that frequently go off when used by people that don't treat them with respect and sometimes even when they are being treated with ample respect.
Although, now that I think of it, bicycles are probably a better metaphor. It's a simple, unshielded vehicle designed not for safety but for getting you where you need to go. Accordingly, riding a bike without crashing requires understanding numerous edge cases that if not respected will end with you grievously injured and sometimes even with respect you won't escape crashing. This is such a truism in cycling communities that they say as a mantra "It's not a matter of if you crash, but when."
You also have the subset of cyclists that ignore laws when using them and endanger themselves and others. Should we then ban bikes because precaution is a "failed solution" to prevent crashing and responsible use? Probably not.
[0] https://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679(12)01624-1/ab...
It is not argument, it is analogy - made-up scenario.
The work safety world disagrees with that thinking. And several workers pay with very painful consequences when they override safety to make things easier.
And my advice for those who don't believe me is to go play and cut a tree with a chainsaw with a disabled kickback break and guards.