So, reducing width of the tire is better for traction because of rotational mass under braking conditions? If you reduce the surface area of two identical brand and model of tires you will notice the thinner tire breaking traction before the wider. In heavy braking situation, ABS will turn on quicker with a thinner than with the wider tire because grip will be lost sooner. I would rather have my heavy tire turning under braking than having ABS actuate the brakes between lock and turn. Compare the contact patch on a street tire, a/t, and m/t. Without even measuring you can see the reduction in where the rubber meets the road. The thinner tire will also wear quicker and will not support the same amount of load as a wider size.
Personally, I would not go thinner than OEM (I've gone wider). For the amount of fuel I lose due to rotational mass, increaded friction, and aerodynamics, I'll make up for it in slightly better safety and better grip offroad (you waste gas when you're spinning your tires because of lack of traction offroad and also waste rubber). To each his own but my almost 5k lbs brick will ride on 285s.
The size of the contact patch between the tire and the road doesn't increase when you increase the width of the tire...it only changes in shape, not size. Wider tire = wider but shorter contact patch. Narrower tire = narrower but longer contact patch. Of course, this is only true for tires of the same height...a 285/70 is taller than a 265/70.
I have driven many lifted 3/4 and 1 ton trucks with large aftermarket wheels and rims (brand new off the dealer lot, therefore no wear) and braking power is significantly reduced on dry pavement by heavier rims/wheels. Not to mention acceleration and cornering ability--CF rims are not just for the bling factor.