I'm not sure I understand the last argument.
Just curious; I know you're just explaining the argument, not making it.
The last point was a weak attempt to note the problems you hear of, for example, proprietary strains infesting non-customer farms. Not strictly a GMO problem, tho.
I'm not reflexively anti-GMO but don't think the case is quite closed (for or against).
My opposition to GMOs was softened somewhat by an incident a few years ago (2012) in the UK. Scientists at Rothamstead Research (an agricultural research institution) wanted to grow genetically modified wheat to deter aphids.
http://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/our-science/rothamsted-gm-wheat-...
I thought the scientists put forward a good case for the research. But a campaign group opposed to the trial planned to destroy the crop. It prompted the scientists to make a public plea to the campaigners to not destroy the crops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9scGtf5E3I
I'd like to hear more from the scientific community on the topic of GMO. In Europe, there is a strong anti-GMO movement which skews the debate against GM crops.
Which is like being anti-software because some software companies are just evil.