I see the roundabout point you are trying to make... but it seems to be WAY beyond what anyone has alluded to.

What has not been said... in this thread or that other thread you mention in your opening post is whether this 'citation' actually happened and when. You 'seem' to be saying that it was an actual event 'a number of years ago', and that it has grated on you ever since as an injustice and silly/stupid excessive use of law & authority.
You don't say what this 'law officer' might have said... or why he... the officer ....was 'way back in the woods' where you were peacefully driving about.

Your point seems to be: "people who are sane and reasonable should not feel bound by narrow, technical rules and should, in fact, NOT mindlessly do pointless things when it is not necessary"...and that "law officers should take the situation into account and ignore irrelevant violations of narrow, technical rules when it is obvious there is no problem".
If this did occur in this situation, then all anyone can say is that you encountered ONE officer who took a different view. *shrug*... just like the one who ticketed my ambulance driver friend.

You don't say whether you did receive this citation and whether you challenged it in court and if so, who won. Your only concern seems to be about "people's right to make decisions, depending on the situation".

What is being objected to here by most posters is not about what was done "deep in the woods", but about your further revelations about driving habits in other situations... at stop signs, on curves...etc.


There is an entire branch of philosophy which debates "situational ethics" and whether 'right' is dependent on lots of variables. The debate is a fair one, but if you run into a cop who didn't read the book, you're screwed.