The incident being discussed here is the blocking of an ambulance. The root cause for the ambulance being dispatched is immaterial to the argument. The positio

The incident being discussed here is the blocking of an ambulance. The root cause for the ambulance being dispatched is immaterial to the argument. The position you have outlined creates a second argument, and its being called out as a distraction. Its akin to "Children eat less fruit when the cupboard is full of sugar" and then someone countering "I don't like pasta, why aren't we discussing that?". They seem related because they are about food preferences, but they are not because the original study was discussing the presence of sugary foods and children bearing on health, not your personal preferences as an adult. In this case the discussion is about an automatic vehicle failing to move aside for an ambulance, and it is not about why that ambulance was attending a job, or about what that job is. Changing the topic does a disservice to the issue.