A vanishingly small percentage of the software in the world has failure modes that kill people. To say the analogy you're making is "only partly applicable" would be very generous..

No, but a shocking amount of unappreciated software can cost a TON of money if it fails, even briefly, which is another disaster scenario.

More software than you'd think can get people killed, though.

And more software than you'd think is running inside a barely-understood SCADA package that runs user scripts, which can now be authored by AI the user doesn't understand, and that can result in either or both of the above outcomes. This is true in just about every city in the world, several times over.

Software engineers have to understand that they aren't the only flavor of engineer, and even if "everyone is a [software] engineer" was the intended statement, it demonstrates excessive hubris. Many real engineers do work on systems with failure modes that kill people.