Criminal Law - Part Five: Crimes Against the Public

Lecture Five in a series of eight lectures on Criminal Law. This lecture is a basic discussion of crimes against the public. The topic is broadly discussed touching on historical perspectives; common law; and modern statutory and Model Penal Code approaches. Crimes discussed include crimes against public morality, riot, unlawful assembly, failure to disperse, disturbing the peace, incitement, vagrancy and panhandling, crimes involving firearms, drug/alcohol crimes, perjury, bribery, treason, tax crimes, obstruction of justice, contempt, sedition, terrorism, and environmental crimes.

[@rachelhayes1384]

I love your videos. Thank you so much for doing this!

[@LSD209]

Failure to disperse… “alarm or annoyance”…. Well, those two words guarantee victory to the accuser.

[@carlaford4932]

This is really good.

[@christianbarristersingingl6359]

Thank you very much for sharing. I have been looking for your Part 7 and 8.

[@stephj9378]

thank you.Will share..

[@christianbarristersingingl6359]

Your explanations are very clear. Are you a California lawyer?

[@xxxluvi]

This is my 5th video 👏

[@kingnico6965]

Define: PUBLIC

[@bguerrero9491]

She won't or won't be clear or honest

[@LSD209]

At 21:00 “You cannot say that this person is a drug addict therefore they are a criminal.” * Scratches head out of confusion “If drugs are illegal ….and a person is addicted to an activity that is illegal…. and the word “criminal” is the word used for individuals that engage in illegal activity, then how is that improper or even offensive?

[@kingnico6965]

Certain classes ??? doesn't the Constitution State that we are all equal 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@latifm5442]

Should professional athletes who break the law (via drug use, illegal gambling, domestic abuse, etc.) be banned from their professional sport in addition to doing jail time?

[@ibrahimceken1014]

I don't honestly know. But since it's a question " should" involved in, I want to say something that maybe useful for you. Along with the prison, prohibition of their maybe one and only career might aggravate their case a lot more than what we expect rehabilitation would do to person. If one motivation of the punishment could be deemed rehabilitation, it is definitely detrimental to one's physiological life in the furtherance of his/her life and his contribution of the state. So looked at in a bit more humanistic way, it would be fit to say even when it would be bound with discretion of the judge, the fundamental axis, by which the case is assessed, should be one in which physiological state of person outweighs the vengeance or deterrence mechanisms. It was sort of something off the top of my head. I hope it would be one you would have benefit from.

[@kingnico6965]

When you look into the definition of public you are going to find out that it means a political entity/body I.E. government employees A.K.A ( #SovereignCitizens ) 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@bguerrero9491]

but Jurisdiction is definitely not EXPLAINED by courts. most people are not even aware of what it is and how it applies because it's usually explained within the procedures with NO REAL FACTS that would answer the questions or concern. and the FRAUD COURT SAYS WELL IF THEY DIDN'T CHALLENGE IT AT ARRAIGNMENT THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO PROVE IT 🤣🤣 seriously? it's because they don't have any jurisdiction unless you say down and signed a contract personally with whoever arrested you or who is taking you to court! That's why people don't know what jurisdiction is!! Criminal Court MCP CODES STATUES is void to the public because the public can't breach a fkn contract the didn't sign or have any knowledge of!