In any case, if anyone feels like in their game the GM has to "get" the players and make them get Lawbreaker stunts, then something is really fracked with the group dynamic in that game.  That's how GMs in parodies of RPG groups play (like DM of the Rings).*  Frankly, if I found myself in a game like that, I'd quit.

Yeah, absolutely.  Which ties into a point that I think gets glossed over in these discussions, and that is that it doesn't have to be about getting the player when its about getting the character.  Compels are already evidence that the game separates the two concepts.  Its very possible to play a game where the characters get slapped with lawbreaker status they do not want, while the players are okay with it.  If the players are never okay with getting lawbreaker on their characters, then they really really really really really need to say so as part of the pre-game discussion, lest they end up having their expectations undermined through play.

I dislike this.

Problems of this sort can and should be dealt with at character creation.

If you don't like 8 shift evocations, tell your players that you aren't comfortable with them and have them make a non-Blast-O-Matic character.

Its a separate issue (for me at least) as disliking 8 shift evocations.  Its about gaming the system to produce unreasonable results in the fiction.  Weapon values are abstractions, but they are abstractions that are supposed to mean something in the fiction.  And the laws are supposed to have very real implications for how characters act in the fiction.  Using the rules to ignore what would make sense fiction-wise just feels all kinds of messed up.

Glamours, like Shapeshifting and Inciting Emotions, does not cost mental stress.  It is not spellcasting.  It is one of the natural powers that some of the Fae have, like inhuman speed and such.

If you want to look at points cost, think of this:  You can get channeling for -2 refresh as well, and on top of that, you get two focus items and the ability to perform any attacks, maneuvers, veils, blocks, and counterspells you can justify with your element.  Glamours is just the ability to veil and produce small items that look real but aren't.  Plus, the entry for glamours mentions that you can use discipline or deceit to determine the effect.  Doesn't sound like spellcasting to me.  Plus, it makes no mention of it following spellcasting.  It's not in the same section as spellcasting.  The only connection between the two is that both can create blocks against perception.  That alone doesn't give evidence that they use the same subsystem.  Otherwise, you could say shapeshifting and incite emotions using thaumaturgy, or maybe breath weapons uses evocation.  

The key to not going over the line with your NPC's is to know what their purpose is story-wise.  If their purpose is to enable the players to better tell the story of the PC's, then you are on solid ground.  To this end, the NPC is only important if he makes a PC more important than itself.  Always define them in terms of how they will challenge the PC's (whether as opposition, or by presenting difficult choices), and then just try to play things out.  When an NPC is not giving the PC's situations to overcome or choices to make (or worse yet, solving problems for the PC's) find a way to put them on the bench or write them out of the story.

It probably depends on the exact effect you are looking for.  Implementing anything as multiple actions per exchange is clumsy, but understandable if alternatives don't exist.  I think in many cases, you could find alternatives.

Example:  You want something that is so fast that it can hit someone multiple times in the time it takes the something to try to hit back.

Solution:  Give it a high weapon/fist skill, and narrate the results of a single attack roll as being several attacks.  An exchange is an abstract measurement of time, not a defined 1 "real" action per turn deal.

Example:  You want a monster that excretes a toxic gas, harming anyone near it.

Solution:  Give it a custom power that creates environmental damage in the same zone as itself, with immunity to that damage.  Cost is largely irrelevant, but consider how many points the environmental damage would be worth as its own "character" if you want to balance the encounter so that it isn't too difficult.

I can do more, if you like.

Meh, I don't see why there should be risks for magic over and above, for instance, Supernatural Might or a bigass machine gun.  The only reason that the topic keeps coming up is because First Law violations are such a nifty way of reining in Evocation, which can easily become game-wreckingly overpowered. 

But its not just for reining in Evocation from being to powerful for the game, its for making the game work on the same assumptions as the books.  It is a fact that in the books, lethal force with magic is objectively worse than doing the same thing with a machine gun.  Hurling around lethal force with magic all the time in the game and not treating it as any more serious than doing the same with a gun is going outside of the Dresdenverse.  Nothing wrong with it, per se, but if you told me we were going to be playing a game of the Dresden Files, it would break my expectations for Lawbreaker to be ignored just because its inconvenient.

Seriously, have a sit-down with your group and explain just what you see in the FATE system... and then ask them how they could HELP you implement it and make it even cooler.

... yes, the GM has to be a master manipulator.

This sounds like better advice.  I'd go with this.

That I (as the GM) tricked or trapped them and they should do better next time.  My players are long time GURPS players and see Compels to the Aspects like they did Disadvantages on their old GURPS characters.  Something they had to take to get more points and then to mitigate as much as possible.

I'm working on this.  *sigh*

Try this solution:  Make compels cost nothing to refuse.  Make sure you don't offer any soft compels.  Still give out Fate points if the character does something self-compelling.  Then, just make things challenging enough and sooner or later, one of them is going to try accepting compels just to see what happens.  When that turns out to make things more fun, others will follow suit.  Then once they dig the mechanic, you can add back in the Fate point cost to refuse a compel.