Slim Slag
I will answer...
Flying in light aircraft is safer than flying in public transport wide bodied jets [Is this true]
No it is not - flying in public transport wide bodied jets is statistically much safer than flying in GA aircraft.
The reasons for this include Airline SOPS, two crew ops, higher standards of crew performance attained through training and recurrent training, more capable aircraft, more systems redundancy, more % of the flight spent in the cruise (a phase statistically less likely to experience serious incidents), operating in and out of airports with better approach aids, very high standards of maintenance funded by mega budgets, scrutiny by regulatory authorities, etc.
However, comparing the sample known as "public transport wide bodied jets" which has highly defined and controlled parameters, with the sample known as "GA aircraft" is a skewed comparison that will favout the jets sample.
The GA sample has broader, less defined parameters since it incorporates a far wider range of activities - e.g. private flying of many different missions, air taxi, corporate aircraft, crop spraying, missionary work etc.
For this reason, the 'public transport wide bodied jet' sample will provide less volatile data and the probability will say that it is safer. (Smaller standard deviation being the indicator.)
The point I made earlier about the linkage between very low probability and serverity is more about one's personal (qualitative) view of risks, so let me explain it again as you seem to be confused.
If you fly on a public transport wide bodied jet, the probability of a serious incident is very, very, very (etc) low. If you do have a serious incident leading to a crash or forced landing, the potential severity is very high. (Even this is not a 100% certainty though, as the A330 that made a forced landing without power in the Azores with only minor consequences demonstrates.)
It is this linkage that determines whether you think that flying is safe. The general public seem to think that the risks are acceptable if you look at the numbers who take flights, you even get some nervious pax who are scared by the potential consequences, but think it is very unlikely to happen to them - so travel.
Risk versus reward must be a subjective view when you think about it, since risks are always in the future and can only be quantitatively analysed once they have developed into historical record.
If you would like to understand statistics better, I recommend my clients to read 'Statistics for the utterly confused', by Lloyd Jaisingh which can be found at Amazon. (Note to BRL, I'm not advertising, have no personal interest
)