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.

> You can't just not have a CCW in the position he holds.

How so? Unless you mean to claim Apple expects anyone hired for that position to knowingly break the law as part of having that position.

He means to get that job the number of background checks he would have to go through far exceed even that of a CCW by a large margin. So if he can't get one even being so vetted that they are intentionally not giving them to anyone but people who the sheriff favors. That's the problem, the unfairness of deciding who gets the permit being decided by a single person with no need to justify the decision to anyone else.

He meant that having a CCW is necessary for the position of head of security for such an organization. The part you quoted makes no assertion that they should be expected to break the law.

Why would the Chief Security Officer of a massive corporation need a CCW?

Not for him

> Santa Clara County alleges that Mr Sung held back issuing concealed weapons permits to Apple's security team