Videos tagged with Malum Prohibitum

This video analyzes Jeanine Pirro's controversial statement on gun laws in Washington D.C. and her subsequent clarification. Mark W. Smith, a constitutional attorney and author, breaks down the legal nuances of D.C.'s firearm regulations, the tension between local laws and constitutional rights, and Pirro's past and present stances on gun control. The discussion highlights the importance of precise legal language and distinguishes between inherently unlawful acts and those made unlawful by legislation.

This video provides an expert analysis of a significant Second Amendment victory in the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Mark W. Smith, a constitutional attorney, breaks down the ruling concerning federal felon-in-possession laws (18 USC 922(g)(1)), emphasizing the court's historical approach to rights and concerns about over-criminalization.

This video explains how recent indictments related to an alleged illegal gambling ring involving NBA personnel can impact Second Amendment rights. It differentiates between 'malam in se' (inherently immoral) and 'malum prohibitum' (prohibited by law) crimes, arguing that activities like drug dealing and organized crime, due to their reliance on violence for contract enforcement, should be classified as physically violent dangerous crimes. This classification is crucial for determining who can be disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment, particularly in cases involving non-violent felonies.

The ATF has removed a 'Faces of Gun Violence' memorial from its headquarters, a move interpreted as a shift in messaging from the Biden to the Trump administration. This action highlights a distinction between 'malum in se' (inherently evil) crimes and 'malum prohibitum' (prohibited by law) offenses, with the latter often associated with federal gun control measures. The speaker argues that focusing on 'malum in se' crimes aligns better with preserving Second Amendment rights.

This video discusses the prosecution of Taylor Toranto for possessing a CZ Scorpion with a pistol brace, which the government simultaneously classified as an unregistered short-barreled rifle and a pistol. The speaker criticizes the Biden administration's approach to Second Amendment rights, highlighting this case as an example of overreach and a failure to uphold constitutional principles. The discussion also touches on the vacating of the pistol brace rule by a circuit court.

This video argues that the success of the Trump administration is crucial for preserving Second Amendment rights. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, emphasizes that the administration's focus on combating violent criminals and deporting illegal aliens is beneficial for gun owners. This approach, he contends, reduces the ammunition for the anti-gun movement, which often uses acts of violence by criminals to push for stricter gun control laws. The video also distinguishes between inherently evil acts (malum in se) and those that are crimes simply because they are legislated (malum prohibitum), advocating for a government focus on the former.

This video discusses potential structural changes to the ATF under a Trump administration, focusing on the reassignment of its law enforcement functions and the potential dissolution of the agency. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney and Second Amendment advocate, argues that by moving ATF law enforcement agents to immigration and other federal law enforcement roles, and by placing allies like Cash Patel and Pam Bondi in key positions within the DOJ and FBI, the ATF's core functions related to firearms could be significantly diminished or absorbed by other agencies. The analysis breaks down the ATF's components (Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives) to suggest how each could be integrated elsewhere, ultimately leading to the agency's demise.

This video discusses significant actions and potential shifts within the Trump administration and the Department of Justice concerning Second Amendment rights. Key points include the push for originalist federal judges, the Department of Justice's reassessment of its stance on gun control regulations, and the firing of the ATF's Chief Counsel. The discussion also highlights the distinction between malum prohibitum and malum in se crimes and its potential impact on federal gun laws.

This video discusses significant policy shifts within the US Department of Justice under the Trump administration, focusing on a renewed emphasis on prosecuting dangerous criminals rather than minor firearms infractions. It highlights a policy statement from Attorney General Pam Bondi's office, directing the DOJ to prioritize individuals posing a violent danger and to re-evaluate institutional reform litigation, particularly concerning concealed carry licensing processes.

This video discusses the role and perceived advantages of federal prosecutors within the US legal system, particularly concerning Second Amendment rights and federal gun control laws. The speaker, a constitutional attorney and self-proclaimed top voice for the Second Amendment, argues that federal prosecutors have an unfair advantage due to the government's infinite resources compared to most defendants. The discussion also touches upon recent news regarding the dismissal of prosecutors involved in January 6th cases and the potential implications for legal and civil liabilities.

This video analyzes President Joe Biden's pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, focusing on its implications for the Second Amendment and gun control. The speaker argues that Biden's justification for the pardon, emphasizing the non-violent and 'malum prohibitum' nature of the gun charge, sets a precedent that can be used to challenge existing and future gun control laws. The analysis also touches on the potential for this pardon to impact political prosecutions and congressional testimony.

This video discusses the concept of 'malum prohibitum' crimes, which are offenses that are illegal simply because they are legislated, not because they are inherently immoral. The speaker uses the incident of law enforcement killing Peanut the squirrel and a raccoon after a search warrant execution as a case study for government overreach. The argument is made that such laws, particularly in the context of gun control, grant excessive power to bureaucrats and law enforcement, leading to potentially tragic consequences and the erosion of rights.