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

Post by philwelch » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 6:11 AM UTC

will4274 wrote: post #652

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>States adopt this policy as a way of punting CC policy making down to the local level. They implement it as a wink and nod end run around the 14th amendment. The whole purpose is so that the states can play dumb when the towns "accidentally" install sheriffs/police chiefs who turn out to be racist and deny all the irish/blacks/latinos their rights.

No, this has American politics inside out. Red states are typically shall issue and blue states are typically may issue. To the extent that it's about introducing discretion as an means to accomplish a specific policy objective by stealth, that objective is gun control, not racism. An end run around the 2nd amendment, not the 14th.

Post by Sylamore » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 6:13 AM UTC

crx07 wrote: post #354

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is illegal according to US law. At my company, we are explicitly taught the opposite: paying "facilitation fees" is prohibited and illegal and that the employer will fire you and throw you under the bus if they find out you did so. They explicitly mention that this is not allowed even if it is the norm in the country in which you are doing business.

I have never heard of a major company that didn't advise its employees to pay bribes abroad. Whether it's legal or illegal is almost aside the point, someone can choose between either breaking some arcane, unenforced US law, or potentially spending months/years in some hellhole of a third-world jail or prison while the Embassy slowly negotiates a release. And in some places, that's assuming someone doesn't just "disa…

Post by philwelch » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 6:13 AM UTC

Ice_cream_suit wrote: post #472

Alex3917 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A high-level exec at one of the world's most powerful companies paying off a local LEO for a permit instead of, IDK, contacting the State or the Feds, is beyond inexplicable. The problem is that, at least in many jurisdictions, gun permits basically only exist as a means for police to solicit bribes. There's literally an entire industry of people whose job is bribing police departments to get gun permits. C.f.: htt…

A CEO I know (billion dollar revenues, multinational corporation ) tells me that: 1.The tricky bit is knowing the right amount of the bribe to pay. Pay a Senator or a member of the House too little and you have made a powerful enemy. Pay too much and they figure that they have a sucker that they can keep milking. And of course, you have also wasted a couple of extra million that could have been directed to another Se…

Post by rtpg » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 6:15 AM UTC

Zhenya wrote: post #612

baby wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are putting everyone else in danger when you start carrying weapons, as an ex-resident of the bay I'm really happy that the rules are against weapons in general

How exactly? IMHO, sf would be a lot safer if the criminals would have at least the concept that someone could respond to their violence with equal violence. Today, aside from the slim chance of being caught by an unengaged police force, the cost is zero.

Post by Grakel » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 6:15 AM UTC

anonymousiam wrote: post #720

smachiz wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or need. A retired NYPD cop doesn't need a gun - a bodyguard might. Often those bodyguards are ex-NYPD, which is how they got the concealed permit in the first place. The whole point is demonstrating a need for a concealed weapon, not qualification or competency.

The 2nd amendment does not require "need". The whole "may issue" concept is broken. Why doesn't California have a reciprocity policy like most other states? Not only can I not carry there, I cannot even bring the gun I have in my pocket right now into the state because it's not "approved" there.