I wish you all the best . you deserve love . And the fact that you feel love for another is a wonderful sign that you are alive and human and a really beautiful soul in my books . <| sep |> I can ' t list every combination that would be actionableThis is the exact issue with this . You can ' t list all of the combinations for a very good reason there are way too many of them . Let ' s show an example . You have two violations in this law , let ' s keep them simple and call them V 1 and V 2 . There is three variations of this which you can choose between as breaking the law . V 1 alone , V 2 alone , and V 1 and V 2 together . Now add V 3 in there . Well , now you have those three from before , plus V 3 alone , plus V 3 and V 1 , plus V 3 and V 2 , and all three of them together . By adding one additional violation , you increase the potential number of ways to break the law from 3 to 7 . Now add V 4 . You have all of the previous combinations , V 4 alone , V 4 with V 1 , V 4 with V 2 , V 4 with V 3 , V 4 with V 1 and V 2 , V 4 with V 2 and V 3 , V 4 with V 1 and V 3 , and all four together . By adding a fourth violation , the potential number of ways to break this law go from 7 to 15 . Now , there is a reason why I refrained from using any specifics there , and not for ease of writing . Each of those Vs are what are called elements . An element is a specific act or intent required in order to call someone guilty of a crime . Let ' s use burglary as an example . Burglary has three elements . The unauthorized breaking and entry Into a building or occupied structure With the intent to commit a crime inside . This means that in order to be guilty of burglary , you need to commit all of those acts . If any one of them is not committed , it isn ' t burglary . Makes sense , right ? Now , some laws do have or elements to them . This means can commit a separate set of acts which makes them guilty of the same crime . This is what your proposed law would be . The issue is that the more elements you add , the more power you give to the enforcing body . This becomes dangerous because as long as the elements are met for that crime , the full range of the punishment applies . Now , to use your specific example but speeding , above the posted limit , and at least 20 % higher than the surrounding traffic , and failure to maintain a safe driving distance could be one of the combinations . The elements here are Driving over the posted limit At least 20 % faster than the surrounding traffic While failing to maintain a safe distanceWell , there are two problems with that . First , you did not define what a safe distance is , and second , you did not define what is considered the surrounding traffic . Is a safe distance 10 feet ? 20 feet ? 3 seconds ? What counts as the surrounding traffic ? Is it the cars within 10 feet of you ? 20 feet of you ? Two lanes ? Within three seconds of you ? How is this defined ? If I am driving 70 in a 65 and violating assured distance but the guy next to me decelerates to 50 quickly , am I now violating the law ? Yep , probably , and if he happened to be a cop , he ' s got me now . But he is the one who slowed down ! Doesn ' t matter because you had said intent wouldn ' t matter . It doesn ' t matter that I wasn ' t the one who made things unsafe , it ' s my fault regardless . Not only that , but if the maximum penalty is a year imprisonment , I can get that as well . I know , it seems like I am being picky , and I am . However , I am because a law requires things to be very specific while at the same time maintaining a level of generality so that they can be applied well . The more you add to a law , the less general it can be and the more likely it is to be weak . Just as well , the less defined it is , the more it can be abused . Another important thing to remember is that if you do multiple things , you can then still get multiple charges of that crime placed against you . If you go back up to those Vs examples , let ' s say all of them apply . You are caught breaking the law because you did V 1 , V 2 , V 3 , and V 4 . Well , they could charge you with that form of it safely . However , they could also charge you with each of the Vs individually to come up to 4 charges against you without it ever tripping double jeopardy . However , by keeping them simple and separate , the laws become easy to enforce , as well as easy to use discretion in and harder to abuse . It also makes it easier for the common citizen to understand . I know I can ' t drive over the speed limit legally . I know I can ' t fail to yield . I know I can ' t not use my blinker . Knowing all the different combinations of those things though to know what I can and can ' t do though become much more difficult . Laws need to be complex enough to avoid abuse , general enough to apply as needed , and easy enough to understand on a basic level for the average person to have a sense of what they can and can ' t do . When you start making it legal to speed in some cases and illegal to speed in others , you lose simplicity . In short , this idea just simply would not work because it makes everything far too complex .