Worst. Video. Game. Ever!

http://xkcd.com/806/

"bad Americans". Like all the ones that use electronic communications, you mean those bad Americans?
Does the fact that China and Russia do something unjust make it OK for America to do that thing to its own citizens?
What if it was ruled illegal in federal court. Would that affect your viewpoint?
I'm not sure you've really thought this through...

Ok:
- Car. In parking lot. Sounds pretty mundane so far. Pretty much they're parked or on the road most of the time.
- Unattended. This is what you do after parking your car. You leave the car unattended.
- Gasoline smell. Near gas powered car in parking lot which may contain other gas powered cars. Occam's razor.
Pressure cooker inside. Are we that far gone we need to fear kitchen cookware? What about a cast iron skillet? Knife set? If your "further action" involves anything more than cooking tips (a pressure cooker is a great cooking tool) then you're jumping at shadows.

People are often irrational.

I keep seeing this come up and I don't think it's as simple as you're making it out to be. If I were to explain to you about my practice of communing with my crystals for wisdom and how the fairies help me out every day, you may reasonably doubt the legitimacy of my views when discussing other topics. Bill Nye did a much better job than I could do in this video where he explains that we need rational, clear thinking children and for that reason we should not inflict religious superstitions on the next generation. It's not necessarily about being superior (though the argument has been made that some beliefs are silly and don't deserve special treatment), it's more about weather someone's belief in talking burning shrubbery and invisible sky wizards should make me take them as seriously as a person with a more rational viewpoint.

The question of guilt or innocence has already been decided at "accused of a crime that you knew they committed". We know they're guilty. At the kid level where mommy and daddy have to stand up for them, the crime in question is probably on the level of "took Jimmy's truck" or "broke Sarah's doll". In the same way a child probably needs to get burned before truly believing a stove is hot and you should listen when you're told not to touch it, an appropriate penalty applied when guilty of a "crime" is important to that child's development. Teaching a child that it's not about right and wrong but rather who had the best lawyer / loudest parent really causes them to miss the point.

Assuming the punishment was just, HELL NO I wouldn't defend them. Children need to learn right from wrong and that bad decisions can have consequences. This is how they learn and grow into good people. Defending a child who did something wrong from the resultant penalties should get you a bad parent award of some sort.

If there's a fire in your house, you still wouldn't want to throw gasoline on it.

Feeling a bit defensive today, are we? Maybe you should take a moment and consider why.

That an encounter with a cop while doing nothing illegal is potentially dangerous has already been established. The degree of danger may be in question but it is without a doubt nonzero. I'd say fear of a bad encounter with an armed thug possessing virtual immunity from the law is entirely reasonable.
Did you just pull those numbers out of your ass or do you have sources? They look a little too "even" for reality...

I would argue that infringing on the privacy of the people to keep them (questionably) safe(r) is just exchanging one loss of liberty for another.
How about we disregard what EVERYONE thinks and go by what the law says. How's that 4th amendment go again?

I have never seen a stronger argument for the creation of a sarcasm tag. I honestly can't tell!

Oregon Trail man, those were digital not analog oxen!

Hmmm...
Assault based on unfounded nonsense is detrimental to all involved, whereas constructive assault intelligently implemented & designed to correct such a situation is beneficial to everyone.
Nope, wait...
Racism based on unfounded nonsense is detrimental to all involved, whereas constructive racism intelligently implemented & designed to correct such a situation is beneficial to everyone.
I just can't think of an example where the right answer to (really bad thing) is to pile on more (really bad thing). I simplycan't get my head around this. Are you really advocating sexual discrimination?