IMHO, a Cirrus will be flown mostly on autopilot, because the sidestick does not lend itself to precise hand control.
On the Airbus, this was fine, because big jets are on the AP 99.9% of the time anyway.
The accident rate of Cirruses has been done to death all over the internet
but IMHO it isn't significant to the type. Firstly, Cirrus have been marketing to the only market segment of GA which has any potential for buying anything even remotely modern (young wealthy men who have not spent the last 100 years of their life flying wreckage and thus accept that wreckage=ok). Secondly, they sold an awful lot of them very fast (and, since they are worth some money, most of them are still flying, not rotting somewhere like a 30 year old plane might be) so this will reflect in the crash rate. Third, they have a decent mission capability so will be used for more demanding flights than a C172 for example (and high altitude flight means more exposure to high altitude weather such as icing - remember in the USA you can fly "VFR" up to 17999ft, and IFR is far simpler than in Europe). Forthly, "everybody" thinks they are unsafe and stall/spin at the drop of a hat (hence Cirrus "had" to include the chute) (which is bollox) so the press looks out for any Cirrus accidents, while a Cessna/Piper crash doesn't make the news.
Among the chute pull accidents, there have been some spectacularly stupid ones, but nothing I recall seeing that one could not achieve in a normal IFR tourer.
I reckon it might be possible that a Cirrus can get into an unrecoverable (flat?) spin if you probe the operating ceiling and stall it and then lose control of it, perhaps with a load of ice collected, and one of the chute pull cases suggested this happened although the pilot seemed to be have suffered a spectacular "memory loss" about what led up to it, possibly to avoid certificate action for FIKI. But, hey, that is what the chute is for