I think they know this all much better than you do. They know that their work is already risky enough by nature, no need to make this artificially more risky.
No one's making anything "artificially more risky" causality doesn't work like that. The test flights determine the failure rate, the failure rate informs the turnaround requirements.
Loosing a test vehicle or 3 (along with crew), even in this day and age, is hardly unprecedented.
Do you think this here is Kerbal Space Program?
No i don't. I'm pointing out that putting a functionally infinite value on human life is only slightly less psychotic and irrational than claiming that it is worthless.
I think that space is a frontier, just like any other, and that expecting spaceflight in it's current iteration to be safer than say early trans-oceanic expeditions or aviation circa 1925 is just plain silly.
If you'd have your way Charles Lindbergh would have been required to wait until 747s were available to fly across the Atlantic .
Or do you think that Spaceflight is some kind of romantic adventure, that has to be sanctified with the blood of astronauts from time to time?
No. What I think is that space-colonization and making humanity a multi-planet species is a worthy goal and that we routinely kill ourselves and other over far more trivial things.
No one thinks twice about sending Marines into combat, or fire-fighters into a burning building, but once space is involved everybody's suddenly walking on egg-shells.
It's Absurd.