The medical profession, aviation, even rail transportation [1] have all progressed past the point where avoidable failures are entirely the responsibility of the individual.
Of course, there was resistance in those fields as well because some considered themselves an "above-average" doctor or pilot who didn't need safeguards, checklists, union rules, or laws. But it empirically improved outcomes.
For example, we might want to make sure software used in avionics, aerospace, weapons systems, voting machines, medical devices, cryptography, power plants, policing, finance, etc is carefully engineered. But I agree with your main point that there's still a baseline of competence necessary -- we need both good tooling and good people.
That reminds me of a lament from a friend at the Software Engineering Institute that the profession missed the boat on the kind of licensure most engineering disciplines have. (That is, any software developer can refer to themselves as an "engineer" without taking any tests, accepting any liability, or meeting any other legal requirements.)