Jonathan,

Furstrating, huh?

JJ clearly prefers inductive reasoning. Must be from Missouri. We're
spouting syllogisms and JJ, whether he recognizes it or not, is basing
his reasoning on a series of hasty generalizations. In fact, JJ has
supported his argument with just about every logical fallacy common to
induction. This is very wise on JJ's part, as his ends (safety) justify
the means (inaccuracy) and absolve him of any errors since his heart is
in the right place. (I know, that sounds flip, and it is: I mean it
both as a compliment and complaint.) So, why shouldn't he take
advantage of those methods so commonly employed by politicians and
marketers to circumvent discernment?

As I've said before, some people can walk upright on a fallen tree
bridging a chasm. Others must get down on all fours and shinny across,
nearly paralyzed by fear of falling. And guess who's more likely to
fall...