Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

morganhilltimes.com

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#141
post #61

Why do Apple employees need to carry concealed weapons?

I assume these are high-level security personnel at Apple HQ. It doesn't seem unreasonable to have armed security at a place like that. > A grand jury alleges that Thomas Moyer promised to donate 200 iPads worth $70,000 to the Santa Clara Sheriff’s Office in exchange for four concealed firearm licenses for Apple employees. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2020/11/23/apple-...

But why concealed?

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#142
post #119
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

I disagree. I dislike Apple's practices as much as anyone, but when the #2 person at the sheriff's office is the one soliciting the bribe, you have a problem with the police department that even Apple cannot be expected to fix. You can argue that they should have gone straight to the DA, and you might even be right, but the only way for this problem to get fixed is by cleaning house at the police department, not by s…

You won't be able to convince me that Apple could not have brought this to light in some way. They definitely share a hefty part of the blame.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#143
post #119
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

I disagree. I dislike Apple's practices as much as anyone, but when the #2 person at the sheriff's office is the one soliciting the bribe, you have a problem with the police department that even Apple cannot be expected to fix. You can argue that they should have gone straight to the DA, and you might even be right, but the only way for this problem to get fixed is by cleaning house at the police department, not by s…

Agree. Also Apple security are in a long term beneficiary position with any given law enforcement entity, especially one which effectively controls the limits of Apple's personal security measures wrt firearms.

To me this seems it would make the "or else" really difficult to think past. What can they do? If they detonate the leadership structure of some department by going on the offense, what is the likelihood they hurt their own ability to work with LEO types in the future? That would be a really hard position. But maybe there are details we just don't have here.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#144
post #81
post #61

Why do Apple employees need to carry concealed weapons?

> Santa Clara County alleges that Mr Sung held back issuing concealed weapons permits to Apple's security team, until Mr Moyer agreed to donate $70,000 worth of iPads to the sheriff's office. Armed security is common at datacenters, for example.

Armed security generally doesn’t carry firearms concealed.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#146

> "When high-ranking members of a law enforcement agency are at the heart of a bribery scheme, it tarnishes the badge, the honour, the reputations and - tragically - the effectiveness of all law enforcement agencies." Yep, that's definitely a black mark against the people that have been beating, gassing, and shooting unarmed citizens for most of the last six months. =)

In what way is equating the actions of some police officers with all police officers different than equating the actions of some specific ethnic or religious group with all the people of that group?

If it isn't okay to stereotype based on race or religious affiliation maybe we shouldn't stereotype based on profession either. Just because some group has become the whipping boy of the moment (for good reason), doesn't mean we should assume the worst of everyone in it.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#147
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

I don't see any Apple apologists here in the comments. Who are you referring to? All I see is the fact that the Apple employee didn't initiate the bribe, the sheriff's office demanded it (extorted it) and the employee was put in the unfortunate immediate situation of either not getting their lawfully permitted license, or paying the bribe. At the end of the day it's bribery so of course the employee deserves to be ch…

"the employee was put in the unfortunate situation of either not getting their lawfully permitted license, or paying the bribe"

...or immediately going to the FBI.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#148
post #119
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

I disagree. I dislike Apple's practices as much as anyone, but when the #2 person at the sheriff's office is the one soliciting the bribe, you have a problem with the police department that even Apple cannot be expected to fix. You can argue that they should have gone straight to the DA, and you might even be right, but the only way for this problem to get fixed is by cleaning house at the police department, not by s…

Esp. because the story continues with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's office extorting other bribes from other parties.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#149
post #119
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

I disagree. I dislike Apple's practices as much as anyone, but when the #2 person at the sheriff's office is the one soliciting the bribe, you have a problem with the police department that even Apple cannot be expected to fix. You can argue that they should have gone straight to the DA, and you might even be right, but the only way for this problem to get fixed is by cleaning house at the police department, not by s…

Don't go to the DA - they work with these people. Go to the feds since this violation of your rights is being committed under the color of law.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#150
post #13

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.

If the system is flawed, you shouldn't support it. Especially as the largest company on the planet. If such a large company doesn't use all its powers within the law to get a fair treatment, who else do you expenct to stand up against such behavior? Have Tim talk to the governor, the president.
Post reply on HN