"Oops, I didn't know sorry" is fine for those who don't mind moving along. For those who know they have the freedom to perform where there is no valid reason to stop and they intend to go about their lawful business of performing, there is remedy.
Threatening an officer is certainly not the way to go but if one insists on violating your liberty they are not above the law. Contrary to popular belief, Corporate STATE and Municipal codes and regulations only apply to certain persons, by properly expressing one's status through NOTICE, a strong basis for recourse is in place for when one is violated. This may include compensation for unlawful seizure, damages for time lost from one's profession and other related injuries.
Uniform Commercial Code 1-201
(32) "Remedy" means any remedial right to which an aggrieved party is entitled with or without resort to a tribunal.
§ 1-202. Notice; Knowledge.
(a) Subject to subsection (f), a person has "notice" of a fact if the person: (1) has actual knowledge of it; (2) has received a notice or notification of it; or (3) from all the facts and circumstances known to the person at the time in question, has reason to know that it exists.
(b) "Knowledge" means actual knowledge. "Knows" has a corresponding meaning.
(c) "Discover", "learn", or words of similar import refer to knowledge rather than to reason to know.
(d) A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another person by taking such steps as may be reasonably required to inform the other person in ordinary course, whether or not the other person actually comes to know of it.
(e) Subject to subsection (f), a person "receives" a notice or notification when: (1) it comes to that person's attention; or (2) it is duly delivered in a form reasonable under the circumstances at the place of business through which the contract was made or at another location held out by that person as the place for receipt of such communications.
(f) Notice, knowledge, or a notice or notification received by an organization is effective for a particular transaction from the time it is brought to the attention of the individual conducting that transaction and, in any event, from the time it would have been brought to the individual's attention if the organization had exercised due diligence. An organization exercises due diligence if it maintains reasonable routines for communicating significant information to the person conducting the transaction and there is reasonable compliance with the routines. Due diligence does not require an individual acting for the organization to communicate information unless the communication is part of the individual's regular duties or the individual has reason to know of the transaction and that the transaction would be materially affected by the information.http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/article1.htm#s1-201