Hacker News Reader

Comment by RachelF | Hacker News Reader

Why do Apple employees need to carry concealed weapons?

I assume these are high-level security personnel at Apple HQ. It doesn't seem unreasonable to have armed security at a place like that.

> A grand jury alleges that Thomas Moyer promised to donate 200 iPads worth $70,000 to the Santa Clara Sheriff’s Office in exchange for four concealed firearm licenses for Apple employees.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2020/11/23/apple-...

I worked at a defense contractor. We didn't have security guards that were armed. It was hard to get into the facility, but still.

Did the CEO of that defense contractor ever come around?

He probably had a protection team, as do most individuals in similar circumstances.

Cook, Zuckerberg, et al. have private armed security.

I think he came around once for a talk, but I didn't notice anything. I forget his name actually. Generally they kept the higher ups away from us in a different location.

The Defense industry isn't particularly flashy.

But why concealed?

Concealed is the only option. California doesn't allow sheriffs to issue open carry licenses except in low-population rural counties.

In public, yes, but presumably that doesn’t apply to security guards on Apple property.

True. I guess I don't know why they'd need a license at all to do that, since I think Apple can allow people to carry within its own buildings however they'd like.

I imagine Apple's security team was interested in procuring CCW permits for use beyond Apple's property. Probably for executive security and things along those lines.

You're right that carry permits are not required on private property.

In California, you cannot carry concealed except on your own property or on the property of a business you own.[1] Employees cannot carry concealed even if they have permission from the employer.

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

We’re back to “why concealed?”

Element of surprise.

And the public image nightmare in the liberal bay area of having all these guns in plain sight.

What? Bay Area banks and retail stores routinely have conspicuous security guards open carrying. Not to mention police, which also exist and are commonly seen in the Bay Area.

> Santa Clara County alleges that Mr Sung held back issuing concealed weapons permits to Apple's security team, until Mr Moyer agreed to donate $70,000 worth of iPads to the sheriff's office.

Armed security is common at datacenters, for example.

Nobody needs a permit to carry a weapon on private property, even in California.

How about when going to the private property, e.g., via a highway? I assume permits are needed for that?

But you don't need it to be concealed at that point right? Non concealed license is not hard to get in CA (I beleive).

Edit: Reading up, you can only transport firearms in CA loaded if you have CCW. And loaded weapons is kind of needed to protect VIPs.

Only if you insist on carrying it on your person. Otherwise you can carry a weapon, unloaded, in a locked case, in the trunk without a permit.

Armed security generally doesn’t carry firearms concealed.

I would assume executive protection, in case some crazy tries to fix the "covid causing 5G iphones" by assassinating Tim Cook or such.

This events are from August 2019, so no covid then.

Good point. The "reason" changes, the crazies never do.

To protect executives and other high value staff

I think the contractors who do that already have ccw permits (they're typically specialist contractors not employed by the company itself, like Gavin de Becker and Associates)

Apple have been known to take services in house.... Why not security?

So... There's no need to issue ccw permits for people to perform their job because people who need ccw permits for their job already have them? That is brilliant reasoning; you must work for the government.

That's not what I said though...

Why do we need freedom of speech? Why do you care about privacy unless you have something to hide?

I mean, why does anyone

I'm sure there are some legitimate reasons (like responding to a workplace shooter) but I imagine a lot more likely is intimidation...

It would be illegal to intimidate a person with a firearm.

Really? A concealed carry permit issued subject to a background check is useful for intimidation?

Why not just intimidate without a permit (which wouldn't somehow make things less illegal)?

I don't see anything that indicates his desire to carry a weapon has anything to do with the fact he is an Apple employee. Some people like to carry concealed weapons for protection.

You know, except the part where it is clearly stated in the article:

> Santa Clara County alleges that Mr Sung held back issuing concealed weapons permits to Apple's security team, until Mr Moyer agreed to donate $70,000 worth of iPads to the sheriff's office.

Oops, I did not read carefully enough.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com