Ok. Putting a passenger in an FA jumpseat IS an intentional regulation violation. That's why everyone is saying no. Not doing something when there is no good option is not an intentional reg violation.
You might, and I emphasize might, argue safest alternative to put a passenger in an FA jumpseat (again, if you even have an extra one), but you're still choosing to actively violate a reg at that point as opposed to letting a situation you did not create and have little control over play out.
You keep trying to say landing is an intentional violation, while suggesting an intentional reg violation. That's why people are mocking you and getting frustrated. Especially since what you think is a violation would only be a violation if you'd known before takeoff. You can't just not land.