I wonder what the Venn diagram of people that think he is being unfairly persecuted and people that thought Brittany Griner got what she deserved looks like.

Are gun nuts so nutty that they actually travel internationally with their guns?

He didn't have a gun, he had a couple of rounds of ammunition that somehow TSA in the states didn't pick up when he went down there.

I read 4 rounds in his duffel he last used to go deer hunting. Probably deep down in the bottom of one of the random pouches. The Fox News article I saw on it was trying to pin all the blame on Oklahoma TSA.

I saw this on the news yesterday and he’s not the only one. There’s another guy who’s already there and they are not letting leave because the exact same thing, ammo left in the bag. For fucks sake! Get a different bag and keep them separate.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Bad on him then. Don't use the same bag for your gun stuff for travel.

Even in the USA there are consequences for that kind of thing. Probably wouldn't get prosecuted, but good luck getting pre-check or global entry.

I think people just get complacent about things that are perfectly legal in their home country.

In Canada weed is federally legal. I know a shocking amount of people who have gone on vacation, unpacked their bags when they arrive in another country and have half a joint or an edible or something left over from a camping trip fall out of their bag. In many places you could be thrown in jail for life for that.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

I generally agree, however there is no situation where someone is allowed to fly with loose ammo in their carry-on as far as I know. People who regularly travel with firearms should probably be extra diligent about this.

That said, it seems pretty clear that there was no ill intent in any of these situations, and the potential punishment doesn't fit the crime. I assume they'll come to some resolution that doesn't involve 12 years in prison.

It seems like the TCI government is trying to make an example of a few people in order to reinforce their zero tolerance policy.

Lots of red hats...

Just a guess - this guy probably flies very infrequently and didn't even think twice about cleaning the bag nor does he have separate bags for the occasional flight.

But I do love our TSA that let him on the plane.....

Maybe, but another article I read said he acknowledged using the bag on a hunting trip to Texas in November, so it seems like he probably should've checked it carefully before getting on an international flight with it.

I agree though - not a good look for TSA considering it has happened numerous times now. Somehow bullets are getting through airport security no problem but my wife forgetting to take her Kindle out of her bag sets off alarms.

There are tons of concerns about how lousy TSA is at catching weapons. For sure, that is a problem. But, the fault overwhelmingly lies with the passenger. TSA exists to keep flying safe, not as a passenger resource to assure their compliance with their destination’s laws. Three other notes:

1. This was on the return flight home. So, he had all that time in Turks to notice (or not) that he had ammo.

2. He is a district sales manager for a medical device company. So, it’s not obvious whether or not he has much experience flying.

3. The State Department has previously issued advisories about this issue for Turks.

Years ago now, I used the same bag for pretty much everything. Hey, I am resourceful. I had a single .22 LR in the bottom of a bag I traveled with that went through TSA not once, but twice. I found it cleaning out the bag when I got back from the trip. Lesson learned, I promptly bought a bag only for range time. Luckily for me, both flights were domestic flights.

I think Americans in particular need to pay attention to how much of the rest of the world views guns. As others have said on the lavender room, the US Left is not left, it is center as far as most of Europe stands and no matter what the right thinks does not change that. Keep thinking that is a harsh view but when in those countries you better realize it is not as harsh as you would think. Diligence should be a bare minimum of a thoughtful and safe gun owner, and you need to go above and beyond that when you decide to go outside the gun loving parts of the US. If you intend on visiting a foreign country, maybe spend just a couple minutes checking out their culture and customs. And yeah, maybe even look at the US Governments statements on said country. If you do not, well you just might do something that country thinks is stupid and get tossed in jail. Their country, their rules. Do not travel there if you cannot be bothered to follow them.

Wrong, it’s the TSA’s fault.

A passport should be a privilege; represent your nation. I’d be A-okay if the stag party brigades were brought to heel by papers being revoked…

something something personal responsibility

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

In this article about yet another person with the same issue it say the one person who has actually gone through trial ended up serving 6 months.

https://www.cbsnews.com/...ggage-tyler-wenrich/

Nope. The buck stops with the passenger.

drn92

Plus, TSA allows you to have some ammo (properly packed) in your checked bags. So, it’s clear that they aren’t responsible for stopping you from bringing ammo/arms to a country where it’s not allowed.

In this most recent case, the reporting says the rounds of ammunition were found in his backpack, so probably not a checked bag.

Like most things, this isn’t a case of one or the other (the traveler or TSA) owning 100% of the blame for everything. TSA is certainly responsible for its failure to screen his carryon bag properly, assuming they’re even capable of detecting a couple of small rounds in a bag full of other junk. The traveler is certainly responsible for packing his own bags and making sure he knows what he can or can’t take into or out of his destination country. Turks and Caicos is responsible for what sounds like an unreasonable policy of imprisoning a tourist who inadvertently brought a couple of rounds in his bags with no weapon or evident intent to sell or cause any violence.

Bottom line for me, is that if you own a firearm, you own primary responsibility for keeping track of your weapon and ammunition. I remember having to inventory and account for rounds expended and in storage and drawn from the armory, etc when I was a weapons officer maybe 25 years ago. Seems like a pain, but probably good habit to keep track.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

yikes, i thought the sarcasm was strong

When you ain't in Mercia you ain't in Mercia. Try bringing a little weed into some Asian countries that are known for exporting a bit of the China White. Not a good plan at all. Just because Americans are very comfortable with a bunch of carry permits and gun laws you are a guest in their country and are responsible for which laws you break there.

Little bit like worrying about all the fentanyl coming into the country. If you don't choose to use street drugs you prolly don't have much worry about getting a lethal dose of narcotics. Drugs coming into the US wouldn't be a problem if there wasn't a market to buy them. America has had a drug problem for longer than I have been alive, and I am old.

I would like to think that's the view of the vast majority of people. You'll have a couple people saying he should get the mandatory minimum and you'll have a couple people blaming the TSA. Kind of like the Brittany Griner case where you had people advocating for her imprisonment and others blaming the TSA. Kidding, no one said anything about the TSA in her case. Heard a lot about taking personal responsibility though.

So does the doe.

I take a rather lawyerly view of blame by looking at who has a duty to whom. TSA’s duty is to keep the flight safe. If something had detonated on the plane, I’d put a big chunk of the blame on TSA, plus the passenger who brought it.

But TSA has no duty to keep a passenger in compliance with the destination’s laws — hence my point that TSA allows ammo in checked bags. They also allow other stuff — like some medication — that may be a legal problem in some destinations.

Of course, we want TSA to catch the ammo before it goes on the flight in carry-on bags. But, its failure does not mitigate the passenger’s blame/fault.

Ugh … my bad !

The bolded was my point. TSA is to blame for the things within the scope of their duties that they fail to accomplish. So in that way, they seem to have failed here. That failure doesn’t translate to TSA having primary blame for the situation in which this traveler finds himself.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Why is this an unreasonable policy? To me, that thinking is arrogantly American.

Heck, you even note how the US military has pretty high standards for ammo and guns, but think Turks and Caicos should listen to America when making their laws around guns and ammo. In one sense, it seems the law might be doing what it was intended to do. With the press it is getting, more people from the US will pay attention and not bring guns or ammo into their country I bet!

Tough gun laws are one thing. But, a potential 12-year sentence for unintentional possession of 4 bullets is unreasonable (not saying that is what the court will impose, but that’s the written law). This was no gun smuggler.

I didn’t say anything about Turks and Caicos listening to America. However, if you think a law that requires prison time for mere possession of 2 rounds of ammunition, and which could give this guy 12 years in jail for the offense is reasonable, then I suspect you and I are working from two different definitions of the word. Their law previously allowed for visiting tourists to pay a fine, but a court ruling changed that in February of this year.

It’s reasonable for them, generally speaking, to have their own laws and to enforce them. However, this specific policy/law seems unreasonable to me.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I don't know much about Turks. I'm reading that it's a British Overseas Territory, and part of the sovereign territory of the UK, even if it is delegated some self-governance.

Though I don't think the Royal Family and/or PM would ever formally meddle in that self-governance, I wonder if some quiet backdoor conversations are being had at the request of Blinken. Granted, maybe this is nowhere on Blinken's radar right now given other international concerns.

I can’t see using diplomatic resources on this guy prior to any trial/sentence. It sucks for him, but he is out on bail. He is not a victim of politics, in contrast to Griner. Saying that Turks can’t even put him on trial is a rather serious disrespect of their sovereignty (or the UK’s).

Tough gun laws are one thing. But, a potential 12-year sentence for unintentional possession of 4 bullets is unreasonable (not saying that is what the court will impose, but that’s the written law). This was no gun smuggler. //

I tend to agree however, daily mass shootings with tens of thousands of innocents dying as the price for our unreasonable gun laws, well seem to make this ignorant guys story seem like small potatoes. And in the grand scheme of things, I would gladly accept their gun laws and consequences over ours in a heartbeat. Perhaps we could then join the rest of the civilized world and not have to focus so much attention and resources keeping our citizens alive...This is no Columbine, or the other over 400 school shootings since then...

What are your thoughts on people in the US who have been sentenced to long prison terms for a simple possession of marijuana?

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Exactly following the letter of the law rather than the spirit is not the route to justice.

Much the same. I think some of our drug control laws levy unreasonable sentences for actions that seem relatively minor, and it doesn’t seem like those laws significantly impacted the more harmful behaviors they might have been targeted at.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

The place I am working from is simply stated that as someone who has never lived in Turks & Caicos, it is not for me to say that their gun laws are unreasonable. These laws are not outlawing something that is outside of the control of the person (think laws against being gay etc…). Guns and ammo are luxury items and this country has decided to take a strong stance against them.

Also, this is just the maximum sentence if I understand correctly. DO we know that is the sentence that will eventually be handed down? When this American actually gets sentenced to spend 12 years in jail over a couple rounds of ammo, then we can discuss if the punishment is unreasonable.

Just because you don’t live there doesn’t mean you’re unable to make a judgement call on reasonableness of their laws. It just means you don’t want to look like you’re telling them what to do.

We know that the law currently calls for prison time. We know that could be up to 12 years. Both seem unreasonable to me compared to the offense. As I mentioned, just as recently as before this past February, he could have paid a fine.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Yeah, I have a range bag that I will not ever travel with.

I, too, would take tough gun laws over our system. But, one can have tough gun laws that focus on those who knowingly possess a firearm or ammo. Putting someone in prison for 12 years for unintentional possession — which is only a theoretical possibility at this point — is needlessly harsh. Deterrence should focus on intentional acts, not the accidental violations.

The difference between accidental and intentional possession is the level of conscious thought a person chooses to direct at the ammo or gun.

Guns and ammo, unlike a joint, have a single purpose, which is to destroy the integrity of living beings. It makes sense to me to set standards to require a greater commitment to thought and attention for guns & ammo.

Whether the standard in T&C is too high is not for me to decide because I come from a country of inattentive bozos. T&C requires Next Level Thinking.

Well, I do not want to judge something with the limited set of knowledge I (we) have. For instance, I know not to get too worked up about the possible jail time for a crime in the US as there is a range and for many offenses that could have jail time, there ends up being no jail time too. For all we know, T&C was not happy with how their existing law was doing at deterring guns/ammo being brought into the country and they felt they needed to bring a much harsher potential sentence option for really bad criminals. And lazy ass tourists will just get a slap on the wrist with no actual jail time. Time will tell. Until then, I will reserve judgement on the law and simply say, Americans traveling abroad need to be extremely careful with guns and ammo! In a similar vein, I would suggest any American that lives in a state with lax marijuana laws be very careful with their weed when they drive around the US. Accidentally have some legal (in your state) weed in your car and get pulled over for speeding in a different state and you could be in trouble.

Not directly responsive to your point, but the notion of intent is a bit tricky in this case. He did intend to possess the ammo, just not at that place. It’s not like he borrowed someone else’s pack which, unbeknownst to him, had some ammo in it. On the whole, this is more like a case of accidental possession (in Turks) but it’s not completely accidental.

I was reading recently about the difference between “neglect” and “negligence.”

Negligence is the failure to use due care, which is the result of incompetence, inattention, accident.

“Neglect” is repeated failure to use due care or a pattern of negligence. Neglect is considered reckless, malicious, and oppressive. It is WORSE than mere negligence.

Given the REPEATED events of gun violence (suicide, domestic violence, gang violence, mass events) in the USA, I don’t think we have a negligence problem in the USA. It is not mere oversight or accident. It is NEGLECT.

Our ideas about attention to detail and carelessness cannot set the standard for other countries. Let’s recognize our failures here.

ETA: you don’t, for instance, ask neglectful parents about whether the good parents’ behavior is appropriate. Undoubtedly, the neglectful parents will says, “it was just an accident! Don’t punish!”

Maybe, though I've never had my car searched for a speeding stop (or any other reason).

And leaving your weed out in the open where it would e probable cause for a search is dumb even for states with permissive marijuana law. Driving impaired is still illegal in those states, and it's begging for an impairment evaluation.

Edit: But per your point, the state government of New Mexico is super annoyed at the Feds for seizing a lot of NM-legal weed while searching for fentanyl.

I think it's important to keep in mind that TCI is a tiny island nation that depends almost exclusively on tourism to drive its economy, and more specifically on tourism from the US. This is speculation on my behalf but I wouldn't be surprised if their recent change in stance on punishment (from fine to jail time) is in direct response to the proliferation of gun violence here. Not that it's likely to happen, but one maniac running around the island with a gun could be disastrous, and I doubt they have the resources to deal with stuff like that effectively. I think they're trying to make an example of a few people to make sure our gun problem doesn't become their problem too.

Neither have I. Of course, I happen to be a middle aged white male. So others peoples experience may be slightly different on that front.

Says the white dude.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Good point!

I got pulled over for a broken tail light once in a decrepit van at 3AM with van full of dudes.

Cop was ready to search until we showed him our crew gear and said we were on our way to take on State.

Profuse apologies and "Beat State!!!".

Wouldn't have been the same if van of black dudes.

Here here! I completely agree with you.

I think you've got the bolded part backwards. A joint has a single purpose and guns and ammo can be used to put holes in inanimate targets (and it's fun). Agree on the higher standards/attention for guns & ammo and inattentive bozos though.

---

_________________________________________________
"The will to win means nothing without the will to prepare" - Juma Ikangaa

http://www.litespeed.com

No, guns are designed, manufactured, marketed and sold as items that destroy the integrity of living things. The fact that they can be used for less injurious purposes does not change what their original purpose is. If they were designed to put holes in paper, we wouldn’t have quite the number of deaths that we have.

As I was running (and hiking occasionally) around my neighborhood lake, I was thinking how Americans are essentially the opposite of subject matter experts on gun-related issues. It’s like penniless people offering opinions on the financial strategies of a financially successful person. Omg. lol

Again, it's entirely reasonable for T&C to make and enforce their own laws. It's also entirely reasonable for them to want to have strict gun laws for some of the reasons you mentioned. I do not find it reasonable to have a law that would enforce a 12 year jail sentence for the offense we've seen described in the current reporting.

We'll see what sentence is actually handed down.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

According to this article there have been 5 arrests under the new law. One sentencing has taken place after a guilty plea and the sentence was 6 months in jail.

With this additional information, I am more than happy to make a judgement that I think the process is totally reasonable. I do not think 6 months in jail is too onerous of a penalty for illegally bringing guns or ammunition into Turks & Caicos (“innocent” mistake or not).

I've travelled the world for over 40 years., you know what country you are going to and have an idea of politics and local customs and laws, very simple = comply
I have absolutely No concern for these Darwin Award winners.

Which is another reason for the US not to use diplomatic resources at this point. Though, at least the Governor and a Senator from OK already jumped into the issue. The Governor repeatedly emphasized that Watson is a father — with the unstated implication that non-parents deserve harsher punishment than parents.

https://kfor.com/...SIGNED_4_16_2024.pdf

The sentencing isn't going to be anywhere near that level.

Wonder what effect this might have on their tourism #'s. Up? Down?

With such an extreme possible penalty for a benign action, it would make me think twice about T&C. I'd also wonder what other unreasonable standards they may have that I may unknowingly violate. I don't want to have to read an entire legal code of a destination before going on vacation.

I'd imagine not much effect. Some "cancellation" amongst 2A types who've never heard of the place before this and were never going to go anyway.

Most people will just shrug as having random shells left in the folds of a travel bag doesn't register as any kind of risk.

There are many countries with strict laws about bringing in prescription medication. Most Americans are unaware of these laws. So, if that experience is any indication, I doubt this will have much effect on tourism at T&C. Plus, it was getting a reputation for violence and maybe this will actually help with that image. Maybe. I suspect that a country with a heavily tourism-based economy has a decent understanding of what drives and deters tourism.

I now have T&C on my list of places to visit as I won’t have to worry about gun-nuts getting all uppity and needlessly killing things. Mark one in the + category.

You shouldn't have to read the legal code, but you should take some time to educate yourself. Before a recent trip to Japan, we made sure that all of the medication we were planning on bringing with us wouldn't get us in trouble. State Department has some high level pointers for each country. The one for Japan specifically calls out Adderall can land you in jail which is a common issue for US tourists. The page for T&C calls out the issues with firearms and ammunition. They could do a better job, but I wouldn't travel to one of those countries without looking at that material.

But now I wonder what other countries warn their tourists about the US and are there different guidelines for each State.

As a person who doesn't take any Rx meds, it wouldn't even cross my mind that they are an issue. Those are the kinds of things that would be concerning. You don't know what you don't know...

I hardly think that importing ammunition into a foreign country in violation of their laws can be reasonably characterized as "benign".

Importing implies intent to use the product for sale. This guy didn't "import" 4 rounds of ammunition in his backpack.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Maybe I should've said "transporting". However, since you're going to be a pedant, "importing" is not incorrect, and does not necessarily imply "intent to use the product for sale". So yes, this guy did in fact import four rounds of ammunition in his backpack.

Ignorance of the law is no defense, as they say.

Not pedantic, just correct, which might be important as it pertains to legal proceedings and whether a person is charged with a crime.

Import does indeed mean to bring goods or services into a country for the purpose of sale. Transport doesn't, and is probably a better word.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

As I already pointed out, my use of "import" was not incorrect. Just because the word "import" has multiple meanings doesn't make you the arbiter of which specific meaning was intended.

But if it gets your post count up, have at it. I'm out.

You're 100% being eye-rollingly pedantic. Siding with eb on this one. This is not a "legal proceeding" and he acknowledged the risk of ambiguity with "import." Is that not enough?

I didn't realize we were taking sides. Is there a uniform or a special handshake that each side gets to use to make sure we know which side we're on?

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Regardless of the words used, it’s pretty clear that there was no intent to either use, sell, or give away the ammunition. It just happened to be accidentally along for the ride.

If he also had a gun in which to shoot said ammunition, that would be a whole different ball game and the potential consequences would seem far more reasonable.

This is an issue of little import to most of us.

---

_________________________________________________
"The will to win means nothing without the will to prepare" - Juma Ikangaa

http://www.litespeed.com

Bring it.

I believe that having a gun in your bag is very different than having a couple rounds of ammo in your bag and should be treated differently in repercussions. You casually lump them into the same category. Half a year in jail for a couple rounds of ammo is still unreasonable, in the context of the situations/intent discussed here.

.

Completely absurd and punitive response to a guy having a few shells left in his bag when he goes on vacation. Can't these idiots in T&C put a few brain cells together and determine this is not the kind of person they have laws for. The guy forgot to go through his back completely when going on vacation. Give me a break. Bad mistake from the guy but the punishment should be they confiscate the rounds and send him on his way.


I wonder if the folks on here saying "let the guy rot in jail for being a gun nut" might also be the kind of anti-gun nut people that hate guns in general and want them all banned in the US? Hmmmmm? I wonder?

I shoot clay pigeons at the gun range a few times a year and I could see this happening to me as I might take a backpack on vacation that I took the range earlier that year. A mistake, but in no way should anyone be put in jail for it.

In your opinion.

I personally think their law is a bit harsh, but then I also think that the Lawmakers/enforcers in the T&C don't give two shits what I or anyone in the LR thinks about their laws. I don't think too much of a lot of new laws on women issues in this country either, but a bunch of lawmakers here don't give two shits about what I think about their state laws.

I don't mean to sound mean about this, but that's the classic Entitled American attitude.

It's not rocket science to research and respect the countries one may travel to.

---

Eliot
blog thing - strava thing

As it is a foreign country I know very little about, I think the law and punishment is within reasonable bounds in my mind. Sure, to many in the US used to guns being generally available for almost anyone it may sound harsh. However, I try to also think about the stance of a country (like many) that is ok with guns and ammo not being available to the general public in most cases. less than one year in prison seems like a hefty punishment but not overly harsh. Bottom line, don’t bring guns or ammo to T&C.

I, like you, do not agree with every law/punishment combo in the US either. For those, I will do my civic duty to elect leaders I think will push for reforms I feel are important. While those laws exist, I will do my best to follow them or pay the consequences. I will not whine when the consequences happen either. Well, not too much :)

You’re saying that the anti-gun people are biased but the pro-gun people are not?

Its not entitled. Its a stupid law that is too harsh. There needs to be an element of intent in the crime, if there was one. There was zero intent here. It was simply a mistake. A mistake that was obvious based upon the context. The law should allow for that. There was zero chance this man was the type of person this law was drafted for and accidentally leaving 4 rounds in his suitcase cannot be punishable by months in jail in a reasonable world.

The folks claiming this man should be punished by incarceration are unreasonable and their unreasonableness is shaped by their anti-gun stance.

I have not seen anyone saying the T&C must have the same guns laws as the US, needs to allow conceal carry, needs to have our system of background checks. If they did, it would likely be the pro gun folks and yes we could then claim they are being biased. But that has not been suggested.

He did intend to possess the ammo. As I said above, it’s not like he borrowed someone else’s backpack. It was his backpack and he put the ammo in it.

He probably did not intend to possess the ammo in Turks. But, since he likely knew nothing of their laws — and perhaps didn’t really care about their laws — he made little effort to cease possessing the ammo while in Turks.

So, the issue of his intent to possess is a lot more nuanced than simply saying he had no intent.

You’re moving the goalposts. This has nothing to do with whether Turks needs to copy US gun laws.

You said that it is unreasonable to have any jail time and then quickly noted that you are a shooter. So, why aren’t your views about Turks’ laws just as affected by your pro-gun views?

There is no evidence he intended to pack ammo on his trip or possess the ammo at the time of the alleged crime, zero. He put the ammo in the backpack with the intent of going shooting, not to a Caribbean vacation.

The issue is are the T&C gun laws unreasonable in this instance? The answer is clearly no to all the anti-gun folks and their factual support is minimal if any. All they claim is "its their country, let them do what they want". While true, it doesn't make the law any more or less reasonable.

The support for those saying yes, the laws are unreasonable, are many (1) the intent of the act ( 2) the number of rounds, ( 3) the context of being on vacation with family ( 4) the fact there was no gun there, (5) no priors of the man....all of these things support the argument the laws are harsh if this man is incarcerated at all.

That is almost exactly what I just said. You’re now adding an element to the intent issue, namely, whether he intended to possess the ammo at that specific place.

Suppose someone lives in a state where pot is legal. They knowingly possess pot in that state and use it in that state. They then take their luggage (with some unused pot still in it) to a state where pot is illegal. They get caught and argue they just forgot to remove the pot. Do you think they will win the argument that they had no intent to possess pot in that second state?

Their economy is based on tourism. It could be the law is harsh because they see the increasing violence on other islands and don't want the US State Dept to issue increased security warnings like they have for Bahamas and Jamaica.

Dude, just in general, you shouldn't be so sure about everything. It makes you sound simpleminded.

We have very limited media reporting about this incident. We don't know what evidence does or does not exist. I think everyone in the thread acknowledges that it appears to be that he mistakenly failed to clear these rounds from his bag, and that he didn't intend to transport ammunition into or to possess ammunition within T&C. However, we don't have every piece of info. We have only what's been reported by fairly sympathetic media outlets.

As for the law, here's what it appears to say, although I'm not a legal scholar, so maybe I missed an application or interpretation.

The original ordinance from 2018 (not really original, but what looks like the most recent full rewrite) states:

"No person (other than a licensed gunsmith in the course of his trade) shall keep, carry, discharge, or use any firearm or ammunition unless he is the holder of a firearm license with respect to such firearm, or in the case of ammunition he is the holder of a license for a firearm which takes that ammunition." ("License" is previously defined as a license applicable under the ordinance, so not just any license from some other jurisdiction. I.e. a US firearms license doesn't meet the criteria)

The penalty is listed as not less than 7 years and not more than 15 in jail, and fine without limit.

In 2022 the ordinance was amended, and the penalty was increased to a period not less than 12 and not more than 15 years, still including fine without limit.

There is a short section on importation of firearms, but that doesn't discuss ammunition at all.

Intent is discussed only in terms of intent to injure, intimidate, resist, or put another person at risk, and those sections only discuss possession of a firearm or imitation firearm.

My understanding is that courts were previously allowing departing tourists to skate by on the minimum jail time and just pay a fine, but in February a T&C court ruled that wasn't in accordance with the law, since the law doesn't carve out any exception to the prison time. I don't know how much discretion the courts are now actually using.

Clearly T&C chose to increase the punishment for these offenses in 2022, presumably in response to increasing gun violence. I agree that it seems unreasonable to require a minimum sentence of 12 years for this specific type of violation of the ordinance.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

You are arguing for a strict liability standard, which is not reasonable in this case. There must be more than simply having some shells in your bag in order for the sentence to be reasonable.

You're making a caricature of the argument of people who think that some punishment, such as 6 months, could be reasonable. The arguments for controlling ammo go well beyond a simple "it's their country."

As to your points, they have some merit in terms of limiting how severe the punishment should be. I agree with that. But, they are not so compelling as to make it unreasonable for another country -- which does not share our gun culture -- to impose any incarceration at all.

1. Intent -- I discussed that in detail above. He did intend to possess the ammo. We don't know how hard, if at all, he tried to stop possessing it before he flew to Turks.

2. Number of rounds -- four bullets can do a lot of damage.

3. Family vacation -- why must Turks care that he was with his wife? If the accusation was that he was a firearms smuggler, I could see the argument that it's unlikely (though not impossible) that he would engage in that behavior while with his spouse on vacation. But, for possession, it's not clear why the presence of a spouse makes much difference.

4. No gun -- Yes, that matters. But, controlling ammo is also a legitimate way to control gun violence. Indeed, when we debate gun control in the US, we hear the argument that it's too late, because so many guns are already in circulation. So, maybe it's not crazy to think about ammo control as another tactic.

5. No priors -- Yes, that matters (at least in the way we think about things in the US). But, the priors (or lack thereof) are a function of the US system of criminal laws. Turks does not agree with those, especially on gun issues. So, while we may think of this as a guy with no priors, they may see a guy who is quite into guns. They are not required to accept the US perspective on what constitutes a prior.

We were discussing intent. I pointed out that the standard for intent that you say Turks must follow is probably not even followed here in the US. That is not strict liability and I specifically distinguished the situation where he borrowed the luggage. Strict liability would apply to someone in the borrowed luggage situation, which I distinguished. So, no, I am not arguing for strict liability.

Can we just digress into arguing whether Singapore's punishment for possession of a small amount of marijuana is the death penalty. Reasonable or not?



.

Not reasonable.

I'm seeing there is no death penalty for possessing or using any amount of marijuana in Singapore. Unless said possession is deemed to be part of trafficking, import, or export, in which case 500g (not a small amount) is required for the death penalty.

But the death penalty seems harsh, even for trafficking.

My last time in Singapore a few years ago, the threat they handed out at customs definitely implied Mary Jane = death.

But yeah, I'm sure there are stipulations required to actually get the sword.

Singapore is an odd country. I always describe it as if Disney were a country, what would it look like. Sterile, safe, uninspiring and ruled by an iron hammer behind the curtains.

8500 dollar fine and a suspended sentence

It seems that a bipartisan delegation of senators, congressmen and others visited TCI to do some lobbying.

Fox:
“Republican Pennsylvania Rep. Guy Reschenthaler said while he is "overjoyed" to see Hagerich is returning to Pennsylvania and reuniting with his wife and children, "this terrifying situation should have never happened to him, or the four other Americans still awaiting sentencing."

"As the Turks and Caicos government works to handle future cases, the British territory must ensure the safety and wellbeing of U.S. tourists. I won’t rest until Americans can once again set foot on their islands without putting their livelihoods at risk," the congressional representative said.“

The Daily Mail:
“Republican Pennsylvania Congressman Guy Reschenthaler wants the State Department to issue a no-travel order for Turks and Caicos in response.

This would prevent cruise ships from docking on the island and travel insurers from issuing policies to American travelers.

'Their economy is overwhelmingly based on tourism, well over 70%. And of the tourists, 86% are American,' he told Fox News.

'So, all we have to do is issue a do-not-travel [order] and overnight crash their economy. And hopefully we can get the Americans released, and we would force Turks and Caicos to change this law.' ”

NBC Boston:
“In an interview Tuesday, Reschenthaler said the Turks and Caicos government is targeting Americans. ”


Perhaps his energies would be better directed at getting the message out that Americans shouldn’t take ammunition to TCI, even carelessly.

A reasonable result, which likely will be given to Ryan Watson and the others, if they wish to plead guilty.

Reading that makes me embarrassed by our country. Fucking clown show.