Every lawbreaker who is willing to try to keep escalating until the other side gives up, yes. But then the problem isn't really the particular law that they first broke, it's the attitude of "you can't make your rules apply to me, and I'll fight you to the death to make sure you can't". And sometimes, it winds up literally being "to the death". But someone with that attitude, that approach to life, if it wasn't this rule that was the issue, it would be another one. So your options are "don't have any rules against ordinary stuff like trespassing, false advertising, petty theft, etc.", or "have rules but don't enforce them if the person resists", or "have rules and enforce them, even if some people wind up fighting the police after breaking that rule, and get killed for it".

I really don't think that the society with no rules against "not absolutely major" stuff would be a very good society to live in.

But then you have situations like selling loose cigarettes. Was that the fault of the rule, or was it the fault of the cop? Well, you may say, without the rule, the cop wouldn't have been in that particular interaction. True. So what would he have been doing? Interacting with someone else, with the same heavy-handedness.