It's a bit unfair, I'd say, to compare a single military fighter jet incident rate to (all?, matured?) civilian aircraft incident rates, as such:

"It's like comparing over-powered motorbikes in the hands of reckless teenagers with school buses."

I'm not excusing the error rate, but civilian aircraft have a faily simple set of operations: fill aircraft with people and/or cargo, fly a pre-determined route at a relatively stable airspeed, and land. Also, what was the error rate of civilian aircraft during development (as the F-16 number reflects)?

Outside of the Concorde, I don't think they have to worry about supersonic speeds. Also, nor are they concerned high angles of attack, or reduced aerodynamics at low altitudes, or low/near surface flying, and a plethora of other uses and scenarios.

Unless I misinterpreted your statement, then disregard this reply.