It's not even so much that the footguns exist but that the consequence of hitting them is "undefined behavior" ie: anythign from core dump to reformatting your hard drive. Compare to Java where the consequence is one thing doesnt work right and someone has to debug it. Rarely it takes down a whole server side process but even then you get a lot of instrumentation and diagnostics to manage it and / or figure out what happened.
C++ is a nightmare language but this specific complaint is completely overblown. The compiler isn't going to format your hard drive (I know that one blog post exists - that is a deliberately constructed example).
A C++ program with UB is just buggy. Same as a java program with bugs. The program does something you don't want it to do. That's what a bug is. The compiler isn't going to maliciously introduce code that you didn't write to order pizzas.
I think there is a factor of UB that makes it have a steeper learning curve than the corresponding issues in other languages: with Java a lot of that category of bad code will throw exceptions and you'll get useful stack traces. UB often results in some seemingly nonsensical runtime state (eg something being null immediately after a null check, or a null dereference only leading to a segfault later in a place that locally has no pointers).
Compare mutating a container in a way that invalidates a live iterator: in java it's a specific exception that you can read on stack overflow, and in C++ it's just a use after free that might still appear to work correctly a random percentage of the time.
