What does any of that have to do with your stance that carrying with a safety on is just as effective? When root causing problems, it's important to compartmentalize. Whether or not someone should carry a firearm is completely orthogonal. Especially in this instance where clearly it makes sense for military security forces protecting nuclear facilities to carry.

Data has shown that if you have a need to carry a firearm on your person, it is prudent to carry with one in the chamber and the safety off. For this reason, firearm manufacturers have been using this as a design criteria. It's not impossible to design safe firearms which meet this criteria. See Gaston Glock.

Back on topic, the Sig P320 was designed to not have a safety. The military version has one, but that's only because military requirements hardly ever change. The P320 and it's military counterpart, the M17, are designed to be carried loaded with no safety. The fact that they randomly go off when doing this is not a failure of the operator or some systemic societal problem. It's a failure of Sig to meet design requirements.

Stop victim blaming.