I think the example is weak; the software was not that dangerous, the researchers were idiots who broke a vial they knew was insanely dangerous.

As a side note, I was more convinced by my example at the time, but on rereading this I realized that I wasn't properly remembering how poorly I had expressed the context that substantially weakened the argument (The researchers accidentally breaking the vial.)

Which actually identifies a simpler rhetoric improvement method. Have someone tell you (or pretend to have someone tell you) that you're wrong and then reread your original point again, since rereading it when under the impression that you screwed up will give you a fresh perspective on it compared to when you are writing it. I should take this as evidence that I need to do that more often on my posts.