Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos tried to board a flight at Tucson International Airport on Nov. 6, 2024, with a loaded, undeclared handgun in his carry-on bag, and walked away without criminal charges, according to an incident report obtained by Fox News Digital.
A TSA X-ray technician spotted the weapon as Nanos' bag passed through Lane 1 at the airport's B Concourse and flagged an officer. The first responding officer recused himself, citing an apparent conflict of interest. A second officer brought the sheriff to a private screening room and asked where in his bag the gun was.
Nanos told the officer it was in a zippered pocket. The officer removed the firearm and found five rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. He then read Nanos his Miranda rights and notified his superiors, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI.
No charges followed. Nanos missed his original flight, stowed the firearm in his vehicle, and caught a later one. The incident report noted the gun was in a hard plastic holster and "was not artfully or purposely concealed."
For an ordinary traveler, the sequence would have ended differently. Federal law makes it a crime to bring a loaded firearm into a TSA checkpoint without proper declaration, and civil penalties alone can run into thousands of dollars. Nanos, the top law-enforcement officer in Pima County, apparently faced none of that.
Retired FBI agent and Fox News contributor James Gagliano said the incident surprised him. He described the standard protocol for law enforcement officers who need to fly armed, a process Nanos evidently did not follow.
"You declare yourself as a law enforcement officer ahead of time."
That declaration triggers a confirmation between TSA and the officer's agency, Gagliano explained. It is not optional. It is not obscure. It is the baseline expectation for any sworn officer who carries a weapon through an airport.
Cory Stephens, a longtime Tucson resident and president of the Conservative Coalition of America, brought the incident to the Pima County Board of Supervisors at a public meeting on Nov. 12, 2024. As Fox News reported, Stephens told the board the firearm episode had resurfaced amid broader criticism of Nanos' conduct in office.
Stephens did not mince words in a later interview with Fox News Digital:
"If a private citizen had encountered that at the airport, the consequences would have been greater."
She added a sharper point about Nanos' professional obligations:
"As a law enforcement officer, he should know the TSA rules, how to declare a weapon, secure it and follow the same rules as everyone else."
The airport episode is not an isolated embarrassment. It sits inside a widening circle of questions about how Nanos has used the powers of his office.
An independent investigation conducted by Northstar Employment & Legal Solutions cleared the sheriff of bullying allegations but reached a far more damaging conclusion on another front. Northstar found that "the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that Sheriff Nanos used his authority and department resources for political gain."
The review also found Nanos' actions "inconsistent with the listed policies", then noted he is not technically subject to those policies because he is an elected official. That gap between what the rules say and who the rules bind is the kind of loophole that erodes public trust.
The Pima County Sheriff's Department offered a carefully hedged response. A spokesperson said the findings "do not support allegations of bullying but note additional concerns." The spokesperson added that the sheriff "has requested the full report for review." The department declined to comment further, citing a pending civil lawsuit.
The backstory involves Nanos' 2024 race against former PCSD Lt. Heather Lappin. During that close contest, Lappin was suspended over what county officials described as unsubstantiated allegations, a suspension that prevented her from actively campaigning. The Pima County Board of Supervisors, which holds a 4-1 Democrat majority, referred Nanos to the state attorney general last year for investigation into whether he behaved inappropriately during the campaign.
The disappearance of 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie, the mother of "Today" co-host Savannah Guthrie, has added another layer of public pressure. Nancy Guthrie is believed to have been taken from her Tucson home in the dead of night, and the case remains unsolved more than two months later.
Nanos was not accused of wrongdoing in connection with the Guthrie investigation during the board meeting. But the unresolved case has intensified scrutiny of his leadership at a moment when the department can least afford it.
Investigators have pursued leads across the area, including Ring camera footage from miles away that became part of the abduction probe. A combined reward of more than $1.2 million has been posted for information leading to an arrest or Guthrie's recovery. The family is asking anyone with information to call 1-800-CALL-FBI.
Last week, the Pima County Board of Supervisors moved unanimously to have outside counsel draft proposed questions for Nanos. The board plans to bring him before the panel to answer questions about his workplace history and other concerns.
That a board with a 4-1 Democrat majority voted without dissent to haul a Democratic sheriff in for formal questioning tells you something about the depth of the problem. This is not partisan overreach. This is a county government that has run out of patience.
Stephens, who unsuccessfully ran for a seat on the board as a Republican in 2024, has called on Nanos to step down. She framed the issue in terms voters understand:
"We as citizens want answers. The safety of our community is at stake."
She also pointed to what she sees as an accountability gap that predates the airport incident. Stephens told Fox News Digital that Nanos was "not properly vetted" and that voters deserved better information.
Meanwhile, the search for Nancy Guthrie continues to produce leads but no resolution. Surveillance footage has shown a masked figure near the Guthrie home, and the family has received a ransom note that included what was described as a second, "far more consequential" deadline. The community's confidence in the sheriff's department to deliver answers is not improving.
"We have information that we need as an electorate to know who we're voting into office. We need all the information that we could possibly have to put the right people into office."
That was Stephens again, and it is hard to argue with the principle. Voters in Pima County elected a sheriff. They are now learning, one incident report at a time, what that choice has cost them.
Nanos' office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the airport incident. He also declined to comment on the board's decision to draft questions for him.
The silence is its own kind of statement. A sheriff who carries a badge, a gun, and the public trust walked a loaded firearm into a TSA checkpoint without following the declaration rules that every armed officer in America is trained to follow. He was read his Miranda rights. And then he was sent on his way.
An independent review found evidence he used his office for political gain. His opponent in a close election was suspended on what officials called unsubstantiated allegations. His own county board, controlled by his own party, now wants him under oath.
When the people who enforce the law expect to live above it, the law means less for everyone else. Pima County deserves a sheriff who understands that.
