Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos was stopped at a Tucson International Airport security checkpoint after a TSA X-ray technician spotted a firearm in his bag. Airport police found five rounds in the magazine and another in the chamber. The incident, documented in a report dated Nov. 6, 2024, did not result in any charges.

That last detail is the one worth sitting with.

According to the incident report obtained by Fox News Digital, the firearm was discovered at Lane 1 of the airport's B Concourse. Nanos was escorted to a private screening room, where the responding officer read him his Miranda rights and notified superiors, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI. The officer noted that "the firearm was in a hard plastic holster" and that "the firearm was not artfully or purposely concealed."

Nanos missed his flight, stowed the firearm in his vehicle, and flew out later that day. That appears to have been the end of it.

Rules for Thee

According to the New York Post, Cory Stephens, a longtime Tucson resident and president of the Conservative Coalition of America, found the outcome alarming and was disappointed it received little attention in the media. She complained to the Pima County Board of Supervisors at a public meeting on Nov. 12, 2024, and has since called on Nanos to step down.

Her point is straightforward:

"If a private citizen had encountered that at the airport, the consequences would have been greater."

She's right. Anyone who has accidentally left a pocket knife in a carry-on knows the drill. TSA does not politely escort you to your car and rebook your flight. For ordinary Americans, a loaded firearm at a checkpoint means confiscation, fines, potential arrest, and in many jurisdictions, criminal charges that follow you for years. For a sitting sheriff, it meant a minor scheduling inconvenience.

Retired FBI agent and Fox News contributor James Gagliano pointed to the protocol that Nanos apparently ignored. Law enforcement officers who intend to fly armed follow a well-established process:

"You declare yourself as a law enforcement officer ahead of time."

Nanos did not do that. He simply walked up to the checkpoint with a loaded weapon in his bag, like someone who either forgot it was there or assumed the rules didn't apply to him. Neither explanation inspires confidence in the county's top law enforcement officer.

A Pattern of Problems

The airport incident is not an isolated concern. It sits inside a growing constellation of trouble for Nanos, who won a close race in 2024.

Consider what Pima County residents are dealing with:

• The Pima County Board of Supervisors referred Nanos to the state attorney general last year for an investigation into whether he behaved inappropriately during his campaign.
• A former PCSD lieutenant, Heather Lappin, filed a retaliation complaint that triggered an independent investigation. Lappin was suspended and prevented from actively campaigning.
• Nanos faces lawsuits and an allegation that he lied about past disciplinary problems under oath, with issues reportedly stretching back to his application to join the department in the mid-1980s.
• A PCSD spokesperson said the independent investigation's findings "do not support allegations of bullying but note additional concerns," though the department declined to comment further, citing a pending civil lawsuit.

Last week, the Board of Supervisors moved unanimously to have outside counsel draft proposed questions for Nanos and made plans to bring him before the panel to answer questions about his workplace history and other concerns. Nanos declined to comment on the board's decision but, through a spokesperson, "requested the full report for review."

The board, it should be noted, holds a 4-1 Democrat majority. When even a Democratic supervisory body is unanimously preparing to question a Democratic sheriff under outside legal counsel, the situation has moved well past routine oversight.

The Case That Demands His Attention

All of this unfolds while Nanos's department is under scrutiny for a case that has drawn national attention: the disappearance of 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie, mother of "Today" co-host Savannah Guthrie. The elder Guthrie is believed to have been taken from her Tucson home in the dead of night. More than two months later, the case remains unsolved. No suspects have been publicly identified. The family has asked anyone with information to call 1-800-CALL-FBI, and a combined reward of more than $1.2 million has been offered.

A county sheriff's office dealing with an active, high-profile missing persons case ought to be focused on that work. Instead, the public conversation around Pima County law enforcement centers on the sheriff's own legal exposure, workplace complaints, and the question of why he walked through airport security with a loaded gun and faced no consequences for it.

Accountability Starts at the Top

Stephens put the core issue plainly:

"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."

She also offered a blunter assessment of how Nanos ended up in the job: "He was not properly vetted."

The instinct to protect one's own is bipartisan, but the mechanism is not. A Democratic-majority board slow-walking accountability for a Democratic sheriff in a county where a Republican challenger like Stephens couldn't break through tells you everything about how one-party governance operates at the local level. The questions get asked eventually, but only after the political cost of silence exceeds the political cost of action.

Nanos's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The silence is becoming a pattern of its own.

Stephens closed her appeal to the board with a sentence that should hang over every unanswered question in Pima County right now:

"The safety of our community is at stake."