The jury has been out on that for a few hundred years now. Consider 1.) An unenforceable (de jure) law ultimately rewards the dishonest while punishing only the honest who confess their crime (Hobbes). And 2.) From a political standpoint, unenforceable legislation creates the appearance of real moral authority without risk of alienating those constituents who would be punished if were enforceable. Public disregard for enforceability therefore promotes dishonesty of both the citizen and the official -- exactly the sort of business an ethical society should avoid.

1. Legal interpretation aside, this guy practically turned himself in leaving such an obvious digital trail. Had he been intercepting the mail he would have been much harder to track down. Unless it can be shown that making the act of viewing documents illegal will reduce the incidence of identity theft, it would seem the preservation of freedom on this topic remains in our best interest.

2. Before grabbing document x (most likely shared by mistake), ask yourself whether you want to be on the shortlist with morally-challenged folks like this guy.

The example you cite has nothing whatsoever to do with the program, which defines a 'clunker' as a vehicle that gets a max combined economy of 18 MPG. The new vehicle must get no less than 22 MPG. Assuming most of these trade-ins will not get exactly 18 MPG (say 15 is the avg here), and most trade-ups will not get exactly 22 MPG (say 28 is the avg here), the net effect of the program may be to halve the overall fuel requirements of that portion of the populace who participated in the program.

The sort of freedom you cite, the freedom to disregard, is exactly the sort of attitude that if left unchecked will result in the decline of your country. Cheers.

So complete disregard for ones carbon footprint is not irresponsible? Generally speaking, is it acceptable for those in power to endorse policies that reward irresponsible behavior? The term irresponsible, having a precise definition, can be argued and shown to have been used incorrectly. If merely being called out to defend ones actions is offensive, is the act of responding with largely irrelevant, hostile remarks not more so?

If vetting of your idea requires expertise that you yourself don't possess, you should be prepared to offer those you consult with a stake in the venture. Otherwise you'd be guilty of the very thing you seek to prevent.

If you are truly a serious inventor, journal your marketable thoughts, email, print and mail them to yourself to establish authorship. If possible, prototype the idea to establish prior art. Let those you discuss the idea with know the idea is documented and you should be protected as fully as the law allows.