Why does nobody seem to think that `null` is a serious problem in D?

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

When I was first playing with D, I managed to create a segfault 
by doing `SomeClass c;` and then trying do something with the 
object I thought I had default-created, by analogy with C++ 
syntax. Seasoned D programmers will recognise that I did nothing 
of the sort and instead created c is null and my program ended up 
dereferencing a null pointer.

I'm not the only one who has done this. I can't find it right 
now, but I've seen at least one person open a bug report because 
they misunderstood this as a bug in dmd.

I have been told a couple of times that this isn't something that 
needs to be patched in the language, but I don't understand. It 
seems like a very easy way to generate a segfault (and not a 
NullPointerException or whatever).

What's the reasoning for allowing this?