If you ranked the harms you are likely to cause, driving a car would be very near the top of the list.
You are exhibiting an aspect of the myopia the article is highlighting.
Suppose you don't drive a car and that makes you unproductive. Unproductive enough, in fact, that you can no longer contribute your fair share in taxes or donations to the public treasury. Or worse still, you may require society's assistance.
Obviously, that makes you morally culpable for the failing to support our compassionate government's efforts to support the poor and unfortunate. You bear contribution to every death that's been caused by the underfunded social services and the lack of social workers.
This particularly stings when a person thinks they are doing something normal like buying a car large enough to meet their family’s needs.
Determining the moral culpability of actions and complaining about it is one thing. And it’s by far the easy part. The harder and more important part is to craft a message that doesn’t sound like an attack on a person’s morality.
Would you be surprised, if continuing to live is then deemed immoral?
We all take on culpability for certain harms to others. It’s just a question of what as a society we are willing to accept.
I don’t think this is an issue of society “overlooking” the morality of this specifically. It’s just that people have a lot of problems to worry about, and the crash safety of large vehicles isn’t high on the list.