I thought the same - the surprising thing to me is that most people disagree apparently; my match was 11% with the majority.
In my mind the rule would obviously have related list of reasonable exceptions filed away somewhere; the simplicity of the rule is to improve the effectiveness of preventing the common case violation of regular people driving their cars through the park, causing damage and impacting the people using the park for its intended purpose.
In my opinion almost all of the examples provided were either obviously not applicable or were perfectly reasonable exceptions (and I don't think exceptions violate a rule).
So emergency vehicles, toys etc are only an issue to a rule-lawyer. Not to normal people.