Posted on 09/21/2019 10:56:08 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
A manager for a prominent private security firm that provides bodyguards to Silicon Valley executives received a concealed-gun permit from the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office months after he made a $45,000 contribution to an independent committee supporting Sheriff Laurie Smith’s 2018 re-election, newly disclosed records show.
The campaign contribution is one focus of an investigation by the Santa Clara County district attorney’s office into whether the sheriff gave out the coveted gun permits in exchange for campaign support, sources familiar with the probe have told The Chronicle.
Prosecutors have served at least three search warrants in the investigation, raiding the sheriff’s San Jose headquarters Aug. 2 and seizing evidence as well from two of the sheriff’s higher-ranking supervisors, said the sources, who spoke on the condition that they not be identified and in accordance with The Chronicle’s policy on using such sources.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfchronicle.com ...
It may be necessary to use Outline to read the entire article.
So why should police have any say over whether a law-abiding citizen gets a permit?
Better, than if he hadn’t gotten it, even after such a contribution.
Bttt.
5.56mm
Prior to 2001, in Detroit it was almost impossible to get a CPL unless you had political connections. Fortunately that’s when Michigan became a shall issue state......
So that’s where we get the 2nd amendment wrong.
Apparently I’ve been doing it wrong.
/sarc
I guess I am a little confused over why this is even being talked about. In California being a political contributor entitles you to kill up to two homeless people by injecting them with methamphetamines. For $45,000 I’d think they would supply him with a stack of blank carry permits and the requisite homeless men and the drugs required to kill them.
After all, 2A says: “The right of a contributor shall not be abridged” ...
This is my county and NO ONE get a permit *unless* you are a judge or big time contributor.
I know of one such ‘contributor’ who kidnapped a guy cheating with his wife. Held him hostage for 2 days and paid him to ‘leave town’.
The guy pleads 4-5 felonies down to simple assault and retains his permit to this day.
You have fewer rights when you live in Californias big cities.
Article shows a seven-year-old picture of Sheriff Laurie Smith. Article contains a link to another article, which turns out to be a link to itself.
Article contains this information:
Lock them both up. If parents go to jail for tax evasion, conspiracy and money laundering, these people need to do serious time.
How do you think it works in new york city as well?
I’ve figured she’s been doing this for years, so I wonder who she pissed off to have this brought to light now.
I know the cost of living is high in California, but $45,000 for a gun permit seems excessive.
I know an entertainer who has a history of drug and alcohol issues. He was able to get a permit in a state where the average person couldn’t.
It used to be similar in Iowa, where the counties with a large urban political machine and/or a sheriff with "Little Bill" syndrome often wouldn't issue permits unless you were "connected." All of them argued that there would be rivers of blood in the streets of Iowa if mere citizens were allowed to carry handguns, but that turned out to be yet another crock of bs cooked up by the usual suspects: Democrats (with one or two exceptions), a handful of GOP-e ninnies and 97.5% of the Iowa media.
Democrats are corrupt scum.
Excellent observation, the Commie Bay Area "News" Media Shills would never run a story even slightly pro 2A Rights involving wrongdoing by a DemoKKKrat Commie Shill doubly Politically Correct Deep Swamp Sheriff, UNLESS she pissed off some incredibly powerful California Marxist Kakistocrat.
That's why I posted this low key story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.