Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

morganhilltimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 1001 posts

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

#481

Post by JKCalhoun »

jeffbee wrote: post #129
tomatotomato37 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Named after a Republican assemblyman, supported by the NRA, passed by a 2/3 vote in a Democratic assembly & senate, and signed in by Ronald Reagan, all due to a group of Black Panthers protesting inside the capitol building while armed. Who knew all you needed was a racial incentive in order to make the stripping of rights a bipartisan effort.

Arming black people is the only strategy for getting rid of the 2nd amendment that will actually work.

Just putting gun control legislation on the ballot is enough (see Washington state). The people of this country seem to want more gun control.

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

#482

Post by tshaddox »

beervirus wrote: post #315
tshaddox wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Surely carrying a gun somewhere where there are no other guns immensely increased the chance that you’ll be killed by a gun, since the number of guns in the vicinity went from zero to one.

Carrying a gun makes it more likely that I’ll shoot myself?

Yes, I suppose it necessarily does, although I was referring more to the chance that in a struggle (perhaps an attempted robbery) your gun accidentally or intentionally discharges.

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

#483

Post by wnoise »

adrr wrote: post #183
pps43 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet somehow the 1st or 5th Amendment are applied across all states uniformly, unlike the 2nd.

How Grand Juries work is up to the states. They vary a lot. Even how regular juries work is up to the states eg: Oregon doesn't require unanimous verdict. I am sure you can dig into 1st amendment and find differences across the states. I am sure states have laws on how and where you can petition.

Oregon and Lousiana didn't. They do now, thanks to a recent SCOTUS case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apodaca_v._Oregon

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

#484

Post by colinmhayes »

kbenson wrote: post #475
gruez wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In what way is disparaging anyone who is a police officer because they are a police officer any different than disparaging anyone that is a lawyer because of the numerous negative stories about lawyers? Yes, because lawyers aren't in charge of enforcing the law, and even if they weren't, there isn't some sort of "thin blue line" where they're covering for each other.

Again, this is taking actions of a group, and some within it, and applying it to all the individuals. That your excuse for doing so is that "they are police" or "they are in charge" isn't all that convincing. Last time I checked, bigotry was bad in general, not just when applied to those without power.

If you sign up to join an organization that you should now is rotten I have no respect for you.

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

#485

Post by tshaddox »

ggreer wrote: post #429
tshaddox wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In public, yes, but presumably that doesn’t apply to security guards on Apple property.

In California, you cannot carry concealed except on your own property or on the property of a business you own.[1] Employees cannot carry concealed even if they have permission from the employer. 1. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...

We’re back to “why concealed?”

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

#486

Post by scottlamb »

thathndude wrote: post #389
jonas21 wrote: post #130

Kinda reminds me of that time the Cupertino City Council asked Steve Jobs for free Wifi and iPads in the hearing to approve Apple's new campus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtuz5OmOh_M&t=790 But I guess they all had a good laugh in the end, so it doesn't count?

Thank you for posting. This is exactly what I thought about. Anyone other than Steve probably would have said something like “that’s something we can look into and explore.” Leave it to Steve to be like “nah. We pay our taxes. That’s good.”

It was probably more "even a broken clock is right twice a day" than a principled stand. He was notoriously cheap. He avoided paying child support for a long time, short-changed Wozniak, etc. [1]

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10

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

#487

Post by chipsa »

throwawaygh wrote: post #57
calvinmorrison wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I simply cannot understand why anyone gives a damn about this. Because I currently cannot get a LCTF from the city. That's why I give a damn. It is currently effecting me. I had no need for that before corona virus, I do need one now. Bucks county is issuing it in 15 minutes. Philly does a whole interview process which goes beyond a basic NICS check and they have chosen to be poorly staffed for a very long time. Ag…

> Because I currently cannot get a LCTF from the city... I had no need for that before corona virus, I do need one now. I'm not questioning that you really do need a LTCF, but with COVID and the protests and the election suddenly everyone "needs" a gun. So there's reduced capacity + HUGE surge in demand + severe budget shortfalls. It's not a conspiracy. It's just queuing theory. > Bucks county is issuing it in 15 min…

A right delayed is a right denied. And it's not just queues, apparently. It's the office is closed. The line isn't moving.

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

#488

Post by FireBeyond »

t-writescode wrote: post #239
wolco2 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably one of the craziest things I've heard. Never commit a crime to look a certain way because it won't look that way tomorrow. The police could be trapping you. If not they now have dirt on you. How in the world can you explain that to a judge if it came to that?

Honestly, this sounds like it's coming from someone that lives in a country where bribes aren't commonplace. It's good that you and I both live in countries like that; but, in some countries, you report your bribes on taxes, they're so common. From the other comments in this thread, it's suggesting that the CCW permit process in California is very bad and broken and these bribes have been an illegal method of actuall…

I used to work for one of the oil giants. They had codified standards for bribery, a la: "While we do not approve of bribery, we recognize that in some places we do business, they are an unfortunate necessity. To that end, we have standardized our practices to keep everyone involved as safe as possible".

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

#489

Post by 1123581321 »

sjwright wrote: post #442
1123581321 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not illegal to joke about bribery.

Correct. And it’s not illegal to investigate when nominal jokes about bribery may be construed as code inviting actual bribery.

I recognize the clever point. Investigations in cases such as these will gather evidence to bring to a grand jury, which will issue indictment. So investigation would either proceed to either the grand jury trial, or be abandoned due to lack of evidence. In the case of jokes, it would be the latter, and experienced offices would recognize this early, perhaps before beginning, and focus on other cases.

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

#490

Post by prepend »

paxys wrote: post #466
thathndude wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for posting. This is exactly what I thought about. Anyone other than Steve probably would have said something like “that’s something we can look into and explore.” Leave it to Steve to be like “nah. We pay our taxes. That’s good.”

Steve Jobs - We pay our taxes Apple's accounting team - Well actually..

I’m sure you’re joking, but I think Jobs was referring to property taxes. I’m not sure how much other tax they could contribute to a local town (sales tax is probably much less than the property tax).

Looks like the property at 1 Infinite Loop was assessed at $330M last year, https://www.sccassessor.org/index.php/online-services/proper...

Post reply on HN