If you don't have good tests with coverage information then your Python and Rust code is buggy too. If you want "as low of defects as I can get from the compiler alone" then your options are things like Haskell and theory-laden TypeScript.
If you have low-defect appropriate test coverage, ASAN approaches linear typing for the class of bugs that the borrow checker catches.
Python and Rust have their sweet spots just like C++ does, I use all three. The meme that either is a blanket replacement for all of C++'s assigned duties is both sikly by observation and not demonstrated by enthusiastic adoption in C/C++ in the highest-demand regimes: AI inference, HFT, extreme CERN-scale physics, your web browser.
Python is better for fast prototyping and other iteration critical work, Rust is unmatched for "zero defect target with close to zero cost abstractions" (it was designed for writing a web browser and in that wildly demanding donain I can think of nothing better).
C++ excels in extreme machine economics scenarios where you want a bit more flexibility in your memory management and a bit more license to overrule the compiler and a trivial FFI story. Zig to me looks likely to succeed it in this role someday.
All have their place, software engineers in these domains should know all of them well, and any "one true language" crap is zealoty or cynical marketing or both.