No, they're far down the list. Less than 2% of all deaths are from auto accidents, fewer than influenza and pneumonia and 20x less than cardiovascular diseases.
Systems that become safer by scaling back automation are anomalies. In general, efforts are better spent improving the automation.
The man vs machine dichotomy is contrived anyway. We personify and blame machines as a scapegoat. I prefer to think of automated systems simply as tools, extensions of human capability. Tools don't screw up, we screw up making them or using them.
IMHO, people underestimate the risk of death and injury from driving. while inciting fear is not really a good educational tactic, i can understand the frustration. my response is to wear a helmet whenever i go for long highway rides. and to avoid transportation as much as possible. (*obviously not for everyone)
edit - disease effects a different crowd than motor vehicles, which i think is part of the risk/cost evaluation.
While car accidents are the leading non-accident way to die, you're 45x more likely to die from a disease.
http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/NR/rdonlyres/2B5A6B25-2026-470...
Page 51-51 has graphs of fatalities ages 1-15 years.
Page 71-72 has graphs of fatalities ages 16-24 years.
Page 117 has graphs of fatalities ages 25-44 and 45-64 years.
The green area labelled "Fordonsolyckor" are those that are traffic accidents.
Summary: At young ages, traffic accidents are a large part of all deaths, but after 45 years of age, the reason of death is dominated by cardio-vascular diseases.
Drivers need all the help they can get from automation, even if it backfires now and then. The fact that any idiot who can spell his own name is allowed to hurtle through crowded streets with a two ton killing machine and no failsafes of any kind is clearly absurd.