Quite frankly, I don't know if NASA would still exist if they managed to off one of the most popular children's show characters around.
Read "An Astronaut's Guide to Living on Earth"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_ac...
The current statistical fatality rate for astronauts and cosmonauts is 3.2 percent. Lets give Blue Origin the benefit of newer tech and learning from previous mistakes and say they're twice as safe as any other spacecraft. That's still a 1.6% chance you'll die taking a flight in it.
How many people have died in suborbital rockets with low apogees and barely any down range movements?
Numbers just aren’t there to reasonably draw any conclusions
The three astronauts of Apollo 1.
As any tech matures, it becomes safer. Early flying was a death circus. Now it's the safest way to travel of all.
It's hard to say where on the "getting safer curve" space travel is with so few data points. But it just might be pretty good. Time will tell!
Because Shatt's space trip was relatively short and quick, he's fairly safe if you extrapolate from the statistics. Of course that extrapolation might not be reasonable for various reasons:
* There's only been one deadly space incident in the last 30 years, so we don't have a very good sample size
* Not all passenger-miles are equally dangerous. Leaving and returning Earth are the most dangerous parts of space travel. However by not going to orbit, Shatt didn't have to leave Earth as quickly, nor did he have worry as much about a speedy reentry.
* Most of those passenger-miles were done on vehicles that have a launch heritage than New Shepard
It would be interesting to do a comparison of deaths / travel time. Challenger exploded 73 seconds into flight.
The Shuttle program lost 2 out of 135 flights over its 30 year life.