Some stay around. Others don't.

So your statement does not invalidate the original point.

My comment is based on my interpretation of the original point.

But I feel like you're pointlessly nitpicking, which is against the hn rules, so please read those.

No, the main thrust of the original point is that Tesla's actions may not be illegal, because some laws don't apply.

And my comment addresses that.

Instead, it would be nit picking to say "well, actually, some laws do apply, and since you said all laws accidentally, that makes you wrong!".

In reality, whatever actions the Tesla car in question did, might not be illegal because some laws might not apply.

The original point, that maybe the Tesla car didn't do anything illegal, could be true.

Might want to look into this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reckless_driving

If a Tesla car was driving around a parking lot in the wrong direction it definitely looks like some of those listed e.g. careless, reckless or improper driving would cover it.

So yes there is a good case to be made that it's illegal.