Reply #59: Yep. Although. . .

[pat_k]

I suppose that the seatbelt law could be applied generally given the resources and the will. "Not wearing a seatbelt" is an identifiable physical state. If enough of us thought the tradeoffs worth it, we could probably come up with some sort of camera check points that automatically generated tickets. (i.e., a means to remove the arbitrary applicati0on of the law.)

There are no criteria in Cheney's "doctrine" that could be used to sort out the "one percent" risks worthy of "treating as certitude." It is an excuse, pure and simple. It is a doctrine that applies only AFTER you've arbitrarily decided that risk X is your "high impact" risk of interest.

BTW. After posting #57, I made some edits before I saw your response. The original (which is what you probably read) was a bit garbled.