Lawyer here (but I don't make any money from it and absolutely have no dog in this fight). I agree. Law is vague for two reasons - first it is often as a compromise between two positions that people were okay having decided on a case by case basis instead of fighting to the death over what to write down. It also is vague sometimes to intentionally capture the spirit of what it is trying to do. While I won't claim vagueness is never left to benefit someone ( I'm sure it happens), I would claim it is rare.

Law is basically a representation of societal judgement. While criminal law is intended to be clear enough to know when you've violated it, that is not the same as beimg logical or consistent. Civil law is even less logical and consistent. Formalizing it into logic generally does not make sense overall - it isn't really broken in most cases because it was never intended to be totally consistent. There are certainly areas that could use cleaner rewriting but courts are generally well equipped to figure out what it means. Congress and the states can always overturn interpretations of law, but the rate at which they rewrite laws because they thought courts interpreted it wrong is very, very low.