Live data from Hacker News

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

morganhilltimes.com

831–840 of 1001 posts

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

#831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This claim is not something you need a CEO friend to tell you. Anyone on Reddit's conspiracy theory boards could give you exactly the same message. (BTW it's interesting to note that in my limited experience high level execs are just people, and prone to the same foibles as other people too. They don't automatically have insight into all things.)

So, at least in that issue, people on Reddit's conspiracy theory boards are less gullible than you, and other people believing these things don't happen/are rare, and that we live in a Disney world...

(And a difference with the CEO, that you probably missed, is that they have more likely than not done these kind of bribes themselves).

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

#832
post #586

I've lived in the Bay Area most of my life. It's well known the only way to get CCW permits in the Bay Area is to "donate" to the local county sheriff. I'm surprised someone was actually caught. I moved to Washington and got my concealed carry in a few months after filling out paperwork. No "donations" required.

I'd assume individuals who want a permit vs campus with concentrated amounts of high-net-worth individuals is a different problem. I can't fathom why anyone would want to live in a place where they themselves need a CCW permit to feel safe.

Well he works at Apple and I'm pretty sure they ended their WFH.

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

#833
post #414

I spoke on a panel with Rick Sung, the Undersheriff who allegedly withheld permits until Apple coughed up the iPads. At the end of the event, each panelist was offered a Starbucks gift card by the event organizers. Rick gave his Starbucks gift card to me, saying, "since I'm here as a public official I can't accept this. Otherwise it would be counted as a bribe." Wild.

What’s funny is he still accepted it, but he gave it to you. Seems like he was either not up on his ethics, or he just wanted to appear ethical. He could have refused the gift. But not sure what California’s rule is, but I expect that accepting nominal gifts under a low dollar threshold is allowed.

Holy cow, the limit for local officials in California is $500 per year from a single source. [0]

That seems really high to me and seems that it’s completely legal for this official to get $500 from each applicant, given that it’s done in a deniable manner.

It’s $50 for a federal employee [1].

[0] https://www.fppc.ca.gov/content/dam/fppc/NS-Documents/TAD/Pu...

[1] https://ask.fedweek.com/federal-government-policies/rules-gi...

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

#834
post #779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The issue, is that we have not even got to the CCW "need" part. The issue is they are still battling out is: is public carry a right or a privilege? Currently the state views it legally as a privilege, per the last supreme court ruling, thus at the moment it does not fall under the purview of the 2nd amendment. And can be restricted not unlike a drivers licence as driving is a privilege. If that changes, then all sta…

This is a 14A issue, not a 2A issue.

Restricting CCWs in a manner that would absolutely not fly for free speech, voting, or some other right isn't the issue. The issue is that some states have set up discretionary license issuing schemes that in practice violate the 14th amendment.

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

#835
post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a few people on here state this. I really wish people knew their rights better. Federal judges have consistently ruled that recording public officials in the performance of their duties is a right under the first amendment. As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent.

> As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent. You can do it without their consent , but can you do it without their knowledge ?

Yes, you can record them secretly. That's according to the federal courts that hold that it is your first amendment right. Don't be surprised if they try ro charge you under the state's laws. You would then have to file a federal lawsuit claiming your rights are being violates. It all depends on exactly how stupid or corrupt the specific officer is.

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

#836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's got nothing to do with "feeling safe". It's such a poor form of rhetoric that's completely disingenuous. You should stop using it.

What does it have to do with, then, if not "feeling safe"? Honest question.

A few years back, we had a snowstorm that knocked out power for 7 days. Knocking out power for 7 days meant our electric well pump didn't work. Our electric well pump not working meant that we didn't have water. We were snowed in with about 6 feet of snow, so roads weren't passable, so I couldn't go and get water, or food, or charcoal to cook the food with.

My neighbor had supplies and was generous enough to share them with me. While we wouldn't obviously wouldn't have died without access to the rest of the world for 3 or four days, it would have been very uncomfortable to endure without any food or water, and that's relative to the discomfort we already had without heat, wherein we literally spent large swaths of the day under every blanket we had, huddled together for heat we also didn't have without electricity.

The next house I bought had a fireplace. We stock wood to be prepared for the unlikely catastrophe of having to endure prolonged absence of electricity.

We put fire-specific extinguishers in our kitchen, our garage, and our basement to protect against the unlikely catastrophe of fire.

We keep 10 gallons of water in the basement to protect against the unlikely catastrophe of losing electricity, and the usage of our well pump.

We keep first aid kits with bandages and neosporin in the bathrooms of our house to protect against knife cuts, or puncture wounds, or glass breaks that draw blood.

We keep a few days worth of canned goods to protect against food shortage.

We keep charcoal to protect against the inability to use our stove, and I have fire-making equipment (ferro rods, a high carbon knife, flints, emergency matches, birthday candles, charcloth) for use while camping or backpacking, but I always maintain an abundance -- just in case.

Many people do much of the above: Almost everyone has a fire extinguisher, or a first aid kit, some canned goods. The government recommends these things, in fact, and there's a run on things like these (and generators, and foodstuffs) before every natural emergency. Many people also maintain gardens for sustainability.

Whether or not those things make people "feel safe" is not even in the same category, but I'd argue that it makes many people feel safe to know that they have their own food and water and heat should the system demand it. You're arbitrarily drawing a line at guns and shaming people for wanting to protect against unlikely catastrophes it may defend against.

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

#837
post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The frustrating thing in the US is that bribing the sherrif or the head of the university is legal, but bribing the low level paper stamper is illegal. That provides huge incentives for the most corrupt to rise to control the institutions they’re supposedly policing.

I work in a library. I've learned though our ethics training that we can't accept cookies from patrons because that might be seen as bribery. There's a strange requirement to accept food: you have to eat it in front of the giver. So we can't take cookies, but the legislator can be fed by lobbyists.

I can’t speak to your state laws, but at the federal level, giving certain officials free food would be a felony, unless it was finger food provided at a “widely attended event.”

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

#838

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why not both? Gun control laws have a very long history of racial motivations.

Laws don't have motivations. People have motivations.

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

#839

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.

The 2nd amendment also doesn’t guarantee concealed carry handguns, nukes or RPGs.

You can have long guns, stored properly in NYC afaik.

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

#840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This claim is not something you need a CEO friend to tell you. Anyone on Reddit's conspiracy theory boards could give you exactly the same message. (BTW it's interesting to note that in my limited experience high level execs are just people, and prone to the same foibles as other people too. They don't automatically have insight into all things.)

So, at least in that issue, people on Reddit's conspiracy theory boards are less gullible than you, and other people believing these things don't happen/are rare, and that we live in a Disney world... (And a difference with the CEO, that you probably missed, is that they have more likely than not done these kind of bribes themselves).

I'm gullible for my skepticism about an anonymous internet commenter's "CEO" friend's generic "in-the-know" boasts?
Post reply on HN