Those who pay bribes for non-essential special treatment are as much criminals as those who ask for bribes. This guy has serious resources at his disposal and is allegedly willing to pay bribes. One must wonder if he has paid any others. I have little sympathy.

I don't really have sympathy, but I think as much criminals is a bit too strong.

I am also wondering if this is essential equipment for the security team.

Hidden carry is never essential for security teams. It is about looks. They dont want the guns appearing in potential photos of Apple events. The guards can carry guns openly just like every single street cop.

I think CA law will not let you have any loaded weapons transported without CCW. And loaded weapons is kind of needed to protect VIPs.

The requirements to get your "guard card" in CA with the endorsement to carry a firearm a very low bar to pass. You see plenty of people making barely over minimum wage doing this. It is the "concealed" portion that requires the permit that can not be readily obtained by security guards without jumping through the same process as Joe Public which is regulated by the local City and County law enforcement in CA.

Thanks, it looks like this is the correct answer. Seems like that option should have been open and what they should have done instead of agreeing to the bribe.

Also some cities have restrictions on open carry of unloaded weapons as well (generally you have to be going somewhere with the gun iirc).

Then keep them unloaded. It takes less than a second for a pro to load a handgun. This isnt hollywood. Close protection details for large US corps virtually never fire a shot in anger. It is a once-per-decade event.

California forbids carrying a concealed firearm even if it is unloaded.[1]

Also California's legal definition of a loaded gun is not what everyone thinks it means. For example, PC 25400 has extra penalties if the firearm is loaded or if, "...the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from it are in the immediate possession of the person or readily accessible to that person." That makes your suggestion just as illegal as carrying a loaded handgun.

> Close protection details for large US corps virtually never fire a shot in anger. It is a once-per-decade event.

The point of a concealed handgun is to react as quickly as possible to what is usually a once-in-a-lifetime event. Even if it only takes an extra second to load a magazine into a firearm, that second can mean the difference between preventing a murder or not. It doesn't matter how rare the event is. It matters what the consequences are.

1. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

Yeah, you're right... this isn't Hollywood.

A determined attacker could seriously injure or kill someone in the time it takes to load your weapon and chamber a round.

Your kind of ignorance almost makes me physically ill... you sound just like those women who take a self-defense course and think they can take down a 6'4" 295 lb. guy who looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger's bigger cousin.

I'd love to see the look in your eyes when someone rushes you at 10 feet and stabs you with the blue plastic prop knife 99 times out of 100. Its the same look those women get when they realize, "Oh shit... it turns out someone who's got 150 lbs. of muscle over me can fight off my puny attacks."

If guns were truly the ultimate force multiplier, military and police would never train for close quarters hand-to-hand combat. They aren't, so we do.

If a 295 lb guy charges you it doesn't really matter what you do, they will flatten you unless the weight is somewhat similar. At some point physics takes over.

That's bullshit, I was deployed in Afghanistan. If you think loading a gun is something I wanted to think about when shit hits the fan you are wrong.

In addition you have to retrain all your reflexes. This is based on years of training that cannot simply be changed easily.

> non-essential

Having weapons for your security officers is quite essential, especially for a company as high profile as Apple.

That doesn't require a CCW. The guards could easily get exposed firearms permits. They need the CCWs to carry concealed and off duty.

You can't carry openly in many places, for example, in CA it is illegal to openly carry a handgun. [1]

CCW is the only option, and they were holding this guy hostage by not issuing one when it was obviously necessary and appropriate.

[1] - https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/faqs/can-i-openly-carry-a-gun-i...

It's not illegal to carry a firearm loaded and exposed in California if you have the proper license issued by BSIS, which is separate from a CCW.

That license is only applicable in specific circumstances, e.g. like for uniformed security guards.

Which solves the problem of needing armed guards.

You don't need a CCW to carry on your own property

You do in California. Please don't assume every state has the same laws.

No you dont. It would be silly if you needed a license to open or concealed carry on your own property. That would make it impossible for most Californians to perform gun maintenance at home or defend themselves from an intruder.

Here's a decent summary from Gabby Giffords mentioning the right to carry at home and at work (requires permission of business owner but NOT necessarily landlord): https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/location-restricti...

If you wanna go straight to the source, section 26035 of the CA Penal Code is a good start:

"Nothing in Section 25850 shall prevent any person engaged in any lawful business... or any officer, employee, or agent authorized by that person for lawful purposes connected with that business, from having a loaded firearm within the person’s place of business"

25525 PC is also relevant as it reiterates the home & business exemption to concealed carry laws

The problem is you're looking at one statute in isolation and not how courts have interpreted it in concert with other statutes.

Yes, sometimes you can lawfully open or concealed carry on your own property without needing a permit. But if it's open to the public, you need a permit.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php?title=Unlicensed...

Does Apple's campus meet that standard of being a quasi-public place? I think it's fenced in and access is by invitation only

You do in California. Please don't assume every state has the same laws.

I was speaking specifically about California. Guards don't need CCWs to carry loaded and exposed. They just need a guard card and a firearms qualifications card issued by the BSIS.

The challenge is that it was (I'm pretty sure) within the sheriff's discretion to deny these permits in the first place. So while the sheriff's office was surely wrong to demand a bribe, there was no reason Moyer had to agree to pay it either.

> it seems likely Apple/Moyer would rather pay the bribe.

It sounds like we agree on the facts. Apple, and specifically Moyer, decided to pay a bribe to a government official. Bribery is a crime. Why do you find it odd that he's being charged?