Given that the most recent QOTW was one of mine (and it was much punchier), I'm dropping this here more because I wanted to share something that I had a "Did I just write that? :)" moment over than because I expect it to get picked:
If your metric of safety is a context like a self-driving vehicle, where crashes of ANY kind are a problem, you can't claim that an exception-based language like the C# vehicle in the DARPA challenge is "safer than" Rust when arguing to keep C++. Those crashes aren't "about" memory safety. They're about implicit control flow paths that slipped through compilation to be caught at runtime.
-- ssokolow on YouTube in the context of commenting on something ThePrimeagen was reading
(Specifically, the "Think about Rust as being better on implicit control flow, not merely on the subset of it concerned with memory safety" sentiment.)