I'll take this idea even further to suggest that regardless of how you're playing and who you're up against, all of the other options (safeties and all) don't make things any easier for anyone.
So, even these lock-up safeties that are suggested have to be executed,
and you have to get ball in hand. With ball-in-hand, there's no guarantee that the out is any easier. Without ball-in-hand, there's no guarantee that the out doesn't become more difficult.
Let's say we play the lock-up safety. The way the balls are positioned, I think to actually stick the ball to the 7-ball is asking a lot. So, I think this might be the position, anywhere up to, say, Point A:
Old Wei
START(
%Fj9F2%G`1W2%H`5T5%II2Z5%P^9Y4%Qh5C6
)END
If your opponent gives you ball-in-hand (which too many people assume will happen), is the runout easier? I don't think so, even if you're a tall left-hander. The cueball path now is going the "wrong way," crossing the position zone through the narrower end or having to work farther down table to get "good." Does ball-in-hand truly make things easier for the out? These are the things to think about, IMO.
If you don't get ball-in-hand (which I'll say is about 50% for anyone given the realistic safety leave), then you have a probability to have either a much harder out or no out at all. Weighing these probabilities, and gauging the layout at hand vs. what could be, then shooting the out now looks better and better.
IMO, the goal should be that when you're left with this layout, you should be thinking "I can get out from here," rather than "what if I can't get out from here."
Fred