41–50 of 1001 posts
The facts of the article seem to imply that the sheriff's office was blackmailing Apple. I am not sure I'd call this bribery, unless there was some reason the CCW permits should not have been issued (criminal conviction or some other risk). The Apple employee should have known better to agree to the quid pro quo, but I am not sure he should go to prison.
The facts of the article seem to imply that the sheriff's office was blackmailing Apple. I am not sure I'd call this bribery, unless there was some reason the CCW permits should not have been issued (criminal conviction or some other risk). The Apple employee should have known better to agree to the quid pro quo, but I am not sure he should go to prison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in a nice area in a nice town. I work in a place that’s generally quite safe. I still carry a gun. You never know.
You never know... what? I'm a 2A supporter and a hunter, but I simply don't understand this kind of reasoning for why you need to concealed carry. The chance of you ever being in a position where having a firearm on you in public will make things better rather than worse is so ridiculously small that it just reeks of irrational fear. If you're that afraid of whatever situations you're imagining, how do you ever get i…
The marginal cost of carrying a gun is basically zero. If I ever do find myself in a situation where I need it, I’ll be glad to have it. And even if I don’t, the fact that random anonymous law-abiding citizens have guns is itself a crime deterrent.
It should not be so difficult for the head of security of the largest company on the planet to get a CCW permit. That is the problem. The system is so flawed, you have no choice but to play the game (bribe). You can't just not have a CCW in the position he holds.
A related historical anecdote. The Mulford Act was the first law on the path towards California's strict CCW regime. Whatever your policy preference, it is history worth knowing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
The facts of the article seem to imply that the sheriff's office was blackmailing Apple. I am not sure I'd call this bribery, unless there was some reason the CCW permits should not have been issued (criminal conviction or some other risk). The Apple employee should have known better to agree to the quid pro quo, but I am not sure he should go to prison.
How do you know which one to choose? Are you sure the DA will side with you if you blow the whistle? Will you or your employer suffer retaliation from the county law enforcement you just outed? Maybe you're blacklisted from future security gigs by being known as someone who rats on cops.
Whenever government officials solicit bribes from private citizens, the enormous power asymmetry there should lead us to prosecuting just the government official(s).
Of course it's not always this simple. Sometimes the private citizen wields more power than the civil servant they're bribing. In other words, the Mafia or other organized crime. But I'm not ready to put Apple in that column yet.
The facts of the article seem to imply that the sheriff's office was blackmailing Apple. I am not sure I'd call this bribery, unless there was some reason the CCW permits should not have been issued (criminal conviction or some other risk). The Apple employee should have known better to agree to the quid pro quo, but I am not sure he should go to prison.
I hear it's really difficult to get a CCW in CA unless you are rich or famous. I'm wondering if that's true?
It also changes as new sheriffs are elected. Where I live, the previous sheriff was known to reject applications, but the current one is known for the opposite stance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I lived there for 35 years. Her Majesty Laurie only bestows a few CCWs to a handful of business people and her buddies. People can apply for CCWs all they want, but she'll never issue them willingly. She's a bureaucrat and a crook keeping the populace defenseless and maintaining LE job security. https://imgur.com/anZTMPx
Imagining getting indicted for having to bribe a local official to exercise an essential right, specifically listed in the Bill of Rights, and held up repeatedly in the courts (Hello DC v. Heller). It's a situation where there are two classes, the haves and have nots. If you aren't politically connected in NJ, NY, CA, etc - good luck. If you exercise these rights, you will end up in a prison cell. Even places like PA…
This was a HUGE deal in the PA gun community, and I simply cannot understand why.
1. PA extended the expiration date on existing permits that expired after February until Dec 31. It was only new permits requests where the delay actually effected anyone.
2. The delays weren't specific to guns. Government offices closed and then opened at reduced capacity. This also happened for DLs.
3. The remedy provided by the state was also not specific to guns. Again, e.g., expiring driver's licenses were extended.
4. The state's choice not to prioritize streamlining this paperwork was reasonable. It had huge budget shortfalls and more important things to worry about (acquiring/distributing PPE, acquiring/distributing respirators, high unemployment, evictions, running elections, finding overflow space for hospitals, moving schools to remote, figuring out how to safely open up service businesses/schools, and the list goes on...)
5. To the extent that streamlining paper work should have been a larger priority, given the severe stress on logistics networks, I'd imagine CDLs would be the place to spend those limited resources rather than CCW applications.
So, an unavoidable delay happened in LOTS of government processes -- only one of which was CCW issuance -- and the government provided uniform remediation to help partially mitigate the impact of delays in all of those processes.
No one was coming for anyone's guns.
TBH the foaming-at-the-mouth response to unavoidable reasonable delays in processing concealed carry permits during a public health emergency is the sort of thing that makes me (a gun owner) feel completely antagonistic toward the PA 2A advocacy community.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You never know... what? I'm a 2A supporter and a hunter, but I simply don't understand this kind of reasoning for why you need to concealed carry. The chance of you ever being in a position where having a firearm on you in public will make things better rather than worse is so ridiculously small that it just reeks of irrational fear. If you're that afraid of whatever situations you're imagining, how do you ever get i…
I’ve never had a fire in my kitchen, but I still keep a fire extinguisher. I’ve never had cancer, but I still have medical insurance. The marginal cost of carrying a gun is basically zero. If I ever do find myself in a situation where I need it, I’ll be glad to have it. And even if I don’t, the fact that random anonymous law-abiding citizens have guns is itself a crime deterrent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I lived there for 35 years. Her Majesty Laurie only bestows a few CCWs to a handful of business people and her buddies. People can apply for CCWs all they want, but she'll never issue them willingly. She's a bureaucrat and a crook keeping the populace defenseless and maintaining LE job security. https://imgur.com/anZTMPx
Imagining getting indicted for having to bribe a local official to exercise an essential right, specifically listed in the Bill of Rights, and held up repeatedly in the courts (Hello DC v. Heller). It's a situation where there are two classes, the haves and have nots. If you aren't politically connected in NJ, NY, CA, etc - good luck. If you exercise these rights, you will end up in a prison cell. Even places like PA…