Apple's Global Security Chief Cleared of Bribery Charges Following Accusation of Scheme to Trade iPads for Gun Permits

[Krizoitz]

On Jan 6 no police officer or anyone else was killed by the mostly peaceful protestors.

Well that’s a straight up lie.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Totally doesn’t pass the smell test.

In our corporate anti-corruption training it was repeated several times that both EU-law and US-FCPA saw offering something to a government official to get something done, or even something underway to be just done faster, was CORRUPTION.

Lucky for this guy neither FCPA nor EU law apply to he US or California.

EDIT: forgot to mention it was made clear that doing something like this was a firing offense.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Nope, still wrong.

Think you have unlimited free speech? Try threatening to kill someone.

Think you have unlimited freedom of religion? Try committing a human sacrifice as part of your beliefs.

Think you have unlimited freedom to bear arms? Try buying a nuclear weapon, see how far you get.

All rights in the US have limitations because your rights and my rights and everyone else’s rights can and do butt up against each other.

But you don’t have to take my word for it, the Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that rights are not absolute. You may want to start with Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (the fighting words case) although there are many other examples.

SCOTUS also affirmed limits on the 1st A., as in you can’t yell FIRE in a theater, etc.

 

[Apple_Robert]

In my opinion, Moyer should have never made the offer. It looks messy and got him in trouble.

 

[Robert.Walter]

The officials in that sheriff county were under investigations for various other misconducts. From my perspective, it is more likely that they were the ones asking for "something" in return for a "smoother" process of the permit.

Agreed but if one submits to the demand it should also be criminal because the only right path when there is such an ask is to go to the FBI.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Have you tried reporting your local government officials? Also, there's no white nor black in the real world of business, everything is a shade of grey. Or you are just too naive.

This is news about corrupt officials. You have a weird obsessions about trying to spin this into something bad about Apple.

It will only be bad about Apple if Moyer is still there in a year.

Regardless of truth or timing, it was a tremendous example of bad judgement; as there are other qualified personnel capable of not being so dumb, such a person needs to be made example of by being let go.

 

[ronntaylor]

Piss-Poor job by the DA's office. Apple already investigated and found no basis for the indictment. The judge clearly saw that the DA presented no evidence to the grand jury. There's just no there there.

 

[Wanted797]

I guess we could suppose and what-about, all day. Judge ruled on evidence as he saw it, not some made up stuff

Do you know this judge? Seems like it.

 

[Flight Plan]

It's for their trained security people who they pay to protect their interests and their executives. Tim Cook alone has had people break into the grounds of his home on several occasions and Apple pays millions in security every year.

Why should Tim Cook have the privelege of being protected by firearms but not you and me? Yet there are people out there trying their damnedest to remove that right from you and me, and to leave us, man, woman, and child as unprotected as possible.

I believe it is along the lines of “Guns for me but not for thee”. Guns are only bad when other people have them but Apple needs them.

Yes, this is their attitude. Just look at any of these big-city politicians, the LA rich and famous, and the governors of blue states. They want to have firearms but deny them to you and me. That's a clear violation of the 2nd amendment.

No, its really not. There is a significant difference between trained people needing firearms as part of their job and random untrained people having firearms just because they want them. Where ever one stands on the gun control argument, that difference is still there.

It's common knowledge that the average John, Joe, or Flight Plan Moe trains more with their firearms than most police do. In fact, the police are terrible shots!

Something troubling about the judgement and actions of Apple's Global Security Chief. If the law enforcement authority asked for these "donations" why did the Apple chief not report this unethical ask to other relevant law enforcement officials? Apple certainly takes every step to follow the laws in other countries but do they choose to not do the same on home soil as things may not happen as quickly as they would like if they don't grease the wheels?

Your point may be right on, except that some people (sometimes police, sometimes company officers, sometimes simple mobsters) can really put the pressure on, and other people, if they're not strong and willing to take whatever might be coming their way, will knuckle under.

"You really should consider paying for our protection (giving us some iPads). Wouldn't want to see anything happen to your business, or that beautiful family you have right there, with those two little girls about to start 2nd and 4th grade."

Who said you cannot have guns if you're in the US? You can apply for concealed carry permit yourself as an individual.

You can apply, but if you live in Hawaii, you won't get one. They haven't issued any permits since the mid 1960s. Or New Jersey. They make you wait until your ex husband kills you in your driveway. Yes, this is a case, and yes it really happened. And she had a restraining order against him. It worked...well, right up until he brutally murdered her. And her concealed carry permit sat languishing while she died on her driveway.

These people are not “trained”.
They are police academy flunkies, and the last people you’d want handling firearms.

Apple should have to hire police if they want to have guns around.

This is all bull. It's not hard to learn safe firearm handling. In fact, we used to teach children. I know, because I was one of those children. Any 9 year old should know how to protect themselves from feral hogs, bears, panthers, and gators. Or 2-legged predators. Because they all exist.

Security personnel in the US need guns because everyone else in the US has guns. Almost no one in Japan (where I live) has guns so security personnel carry only batons as standard issue. This is only an Apple culture issue because it’s a US culture issue.

No, people need firearms because bad people are willing to kill innocent, weaker, older, or other at-risk people in order to get what they want. My father used to tell me, "some people will kill you for a quarter, so always be aware of your surroundings."

You can be killed with a knife, a rope, a baseball bat, or a tire-iron just as horribly as you can with a gun. I don't arm myself to protect me from other people with guns. I arm myself to protect me from ANYBODY who might want to do me mortal harm, especially if I might not be able to run fast enough to escape them.

SMFH. Why do you need a permit to carry a gun ? Real 🇺🇸 doesn’t trample on your rights like that.

Permits should not be needed. If you're too dangerous to have a firearm, you should be in prison or a mental institution.

No, random people are untrained. Are you implying that of all the people who get guns in this country that everyone is trained in their use? While many people are trained and have experience from Police, security and military, even gun clubs, there is little, if any checking, to ensure that you are trained to use a gun, to get a gun. so yes, the poster was correct, there are many untrained people with guns, its just that there are, I think, more people who own guns who are responsible and trained in their use, safety and care.

I agree. A lot more people are trained, and are trained better than the police. Most cops only have to qualify annually or even less often than that. I know a lot of people that, as long as range ammo is available, go to the range every few weeks.

Also, as a group, concealed carriers get into less trouble with the law than even police officers.

Need a Kevlar iPad Pro case instead.

There you go...something for that plate carrier!

Because you don’t have an unlimited right to anything.

You might want to take a refresher course on the US Constitution if you think that.

But the 2nd amendment has a lot of unconstitutional limits already placed on it. This is wrong.

LOL no. Turns out the world isn’t black and white. You can believe in gun control that is more strict than the US has but less strict than no one can ever have guns. Plenty of countries exist in that space right now. Canada for example.

The world may not be black and white, but the US Constitution is. "Shall not be abridged" meant something at one time, and yes the founding fathers and early US government KNEW about high capacity and repeat-fire firearms. In fact, they tried to buy them but were declined by the manufacturer!

Again no.
Grenades have a purpose, doesn’t mean anyone should be able to have one.
Anesthesia has a purpose, doesn’t mean you should be able to buy it at the corner store.

Security guards with guns and random person with gun are two completely different situations. Even if you believe the latter should be allowed to have them, it’s still different.

Grenades aren't firearms. The 2nd amendment is about being able to arm one's self for protection. The founding fathers recognized that a country who didn't allow its citizenry to be armed would always be at risk for tyranny or conquest. The 2nd amendment is for EVERYBODY legally in the US. It's not just for Hollywood actors, Blue State governors, and policy wonks who work in the US Capitol. Why is this such a hard thing for people to grasp?

Spot on! I was an engineer at an aerospace company in Sunnyvale, California (the middle of Silicon Valley) a few decades ago where a disgruntled employee who was fixated on a female engineer came in with guns and killed seven people and wounded a few others.

Sadly, I can see a similar event happening at other large companies in the area.

I remember that case. It could be argued that if firearms were allowed on the premises, that another employee could have stopped him before he got to 7 murder victims. But this one is also complicated by US Federal law pertaining to military contractors, which also may very well be in violation of the 2nd amendment...but that's an argument for another time.

 

[JosephAW]

Why should Tim Cook have the privelege of being protected by firearms but not you and me? Yet there are people out there trying their damnedest to remove that right from you and me, and to leave us, man, woman, and child as unprotected as possible.

Yes, this is their attitude. Just look at any of these big-city politicians, the LA rich and famous, and the governors of blue states. They want to have firearms but deny them to you and me. That's a clear violation of the 2nd amendment.

It's common knowledge that the average John, Joe, or Flight Plan Moe trains more with their firearms than most police do. In fact, the police are terrible shots!

Your point may be right on, except that some people (sometimes police, sometimes company officers, sometimes simple mobsters) can really put the pressure on, and other people, if they're not strong and willing to take whatever might be coming their way, will knuckle under.

"You really should consider paying for our protection (giving us some iPads). Wouldn't want to see anything happen to your business, or that beautiful family you have right there, with those two little girls about to start 2nd and 4th grade."

You can apply, but if you live in Hawaii, you won't get one. They haven't issued any permits since the mid 1960s. Or New Jersey. They make you wait until your ex husband kills you in your driveway. Yes, this is a case, and yes it really happened. And she had a restraining order against him. It worked...well, right up until he brutally murdered her. And her concealed carry permit sat languishing while she died on her driveway.

This is all bull. It's not hard to learn safe firearm handling. In fact, we used to teach children. I know, because I was one of those children. Any 9 year old should know how to protect themselves from feral hogs, bears, panthers, and gators. Or 2-legged predators. Because they all exist.


No, people need firearms because bad people are willing to kill innocent, weaker, older, or other at-risk people in order to get what they want. My father used to tell me, "some people will kill you for a quarter, so always be aware of your surroundings."

You can be killed with a knife, a rope, a baseball bat, or a tire-iron just as horribly as you can with a gun. I don't arm myself to protect me from other people with guns. I arm myself to protect me from ANYBODY who might want to do me mortal harm, especially if I might not be able to run fast enough to escape them.

Permits should not be needed. If you're too dangerous to have a firearm, you should be in prison or a mental institution.


I agree. A lot more people are trained, and are trained better than the police. Most cops only have to qualify annually or even less often than that. I know a lot of people that, as long as range ammo is available, go to the range every few weeks.

Also, as a group, concealed carriers get into less trouble with the law than even police officers.


There you go...something for that plate carrier!

But the 2nd amendment has a lot of unconstitutional limits already placed on it. This is wrong.

The world may not be black and white, but the US Constitution is. "Shall not be abridged" meant something at one time, and yes the founding fathers and early US government KNEW about high capacity and repeat-fire firearms. In fact, they tried to buy them but were declined by the manufacturer!

Grenades aren't firearms. The 2nd amendment is about being able to arm one's self for protection. The founding fathers recognized that a country who didn't allow its citizenry to be armed would always be at risk for tyranny or conquest. The 2nd amendment is for EVERYBODY legally in the US. It's not just for Hollywood actors, Blue State governors, and policy wonks who work in the US Capitol. Why is this such a hard thing for people to grasp?

I remember that case. It could be argued that if firearms were allowed on the premises, that another employee could have stopped him before he got to 7 murder victims. But this one is also complicated by US Federal law pertaining to military contractors, which also may very well be in violation of the 2nd amendment...but that's an argument for another time.

You seem to be an expert on a lot of things

 

[ian87w]

You can apply, but if you live in Hawaii, you won't get one. They haven't issued any permits since the mid 1960s. Or New Jersey. They make you wait until your ex husband kills you in your driveway. Yes, this is a case, and yes it really happened. And she had a restraining order against him. It worked...well, right up until he brutally murdered her. And her concealed carry permit sat languishing while she died on her driveway.

Then maybe one should vote for officials in office who will uphold your rights. This scandal should make people asking themselves, why were these corrupt officials in office to begin with, instead of merely calling Apple names.

Sometimes, people get the leaders they deserved.

 

[Krizoitz]

t's common knowledge that the average John, Joe, or Flight Plan Moe trains more with their firearms than most police do. In fact, the police are terrible shots!

“Common knowledge” eh?
show me verifiable evidence of this supposedly “common knowledge” then. Should be easy if it’s so common.

 

[Krizoitz]

No, people need firearms because bad people are willing to kill innocent, weaker, older, or other at-risk people in order to get what they want. My father used to tell me, "some people will kill you for a quarter, so always be aware of your surroundings."

In that case the US, with its high level of guns should be the safest place on the planet with the lowest levels of crime and violence. Meanwhile countries like Japan should be the least safe and have the highest levels of crime.
Turns out it’s the opposite because reality isn’t some NRA fantasy land where gun toting citizens need to defend themselves from crazed villains every day. You don’t need a gun to keep you safe, you want a gun to make you feel tough or compensate for some other issue.

 

[Krizoitz]

Grenades aren't firearms. The 2nd amendment is about being able to arm one's self for protection. The founding fathers recognized that a country who didn't allow its citizenry to be armed would always be at risk for tyranny or conquest. The 2nd amendment is for EVERYBODY legally in the US. It's not just for Hollywood actors, Blue State governors, and policy wonks who work in the US Capitol. Why is this such a hard thing for people to grasp?

Before you complain about others not grasping things you should start with yourself since you clearly can’t grasp the simple words I wrote. I never said grenades were fire arms, I was replying to the ridiculous claim that we shouldn’t ban or limit things if someone can claim a use for them.
Meanwhile, the 2nd Ammendment wasn’t written for self defense, it was written for national defense. Hence the whole “a well regulated militia” part you gun nuts ignore. The idea of the 2nd Ammendment being about self defense and individual gun ownership is a late 20th century myth dreamed up by the NRA and embraced by the far right. Next time you might want to actually study some history before spouting off about a topic you clearly do not have even a basic grasp of.