Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight,
nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US."
CO953 wrote:Very interesting. A couple months ago on a thread where someone asked about transporting firearms, I described something like this happening to me.
At LAX back about 2004 I was at the ticketing counter checking in and while reaching into my backpack for the printed itinerary I discovered a single stray bullet in the pocket which had somehow become folded into a seam due to a gap in the stitching. I immediately declared it to the ticketing agent (it was United Airlines if I recall correctly) and asked what I should do. She said that it was up to me ..... As I had been dropped off - had no ride or vehicle- I asked if the airport had a disposal procedure or whether I should throw it in a trash can or what? The agent repeated her non-response. I was not too happy because it was not that long after 9/11 and I figured that the airports should have some sort of procedure. I would have been happy to wait a few minutes and turn it over to an airport policeman or something.
Faced with the unhelpful non-response, and not being in a position to transport myself out of the airport, I simply walked to the curb and dropped it into a trash can, then returned to the counter and checked in.
With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight, if they immediately declare the mistake. There has to be some room still reserved for the human factor in air travel, and the occasional human mistake. Same thing applies to anyone not aware of New York's repeated (unconstitutional) detention of passengers who have legally checked a firearm in another state of flight origin and then transited through a New York airport on the way to somewhere else and been ambushed by police during the stop-over. This violates the transit protections of the Commerce clause of the Constitution that allows your Pennsylvania driver's license, for example, to be valid for driving through Wyoming on a vacation. It should apply to a passenger in transit, but of course certain American states nowadays feel free to make their own laws just like in 1861.
I hope that the situation in Japan will be solved sensibly and quickly. Every man-hour applied to something like this detracts from man-hours applied to true threats......
The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is reminding United States (U.S.) travellers to educate themselves on Canadian firearm laws, following an incident at the Chief Mountain border crossing.
On July 3, CBSA officers seized four undeclared handguns from a Minnesota man who had been referred for a routine examination. All of these firearms were found in luggage stored inside a pickup truck box:
a .45-calibre revolver;
a .50-calibre revolver;
a .40-calibre pistol (loaded); and,
a .45-calibre pistol.
The traveller was arrested and his vehicle was also seized, as it had been used to unlawfully import goods. He had to pay a $4,000 penalty to get it back. As per standard CBSA procedure, the handguns will be destroyed.
The CBSA strongly recommends that travellers not carry their firearms when travelling to Canada or transiting through Canada to Alaska. However, should you choose to travel with your firearms, you must declare all firearms in your possession at the first Canadian designated port of entry. You must also have all the necessary permits and have your firearm appropriately stored.
Firearms are high-risk commodities and their interdiction is a CBSA enforcement priority. Travellers who do not declare firearms upon arrival can face arrest, seizure, monetary penalties, and criminal prosecution. Failing to declare firearms can also make visitors inadmissible to enter Canada.
CBSA officers at the Lansdowne (Thousand Island) port of entry arrested two men and seized three firearms in separate incidents on May 3 and May 9.
On May 3, 2017, a 53-year-old commercial driver and resident of Florida sought entry to Canada and was referred for a secondary examination. During the exam, officers discovered an undeclared firearm in a duffle bag in his truck. The driver was arrested and admitted to being in possession of another firearm in another bag in his vehicle. Both weapons were loaded and in holsters, one of them with an additional overcapacity magazine. The driver had a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Florida but failed to declare any weapons at primary inspection.
A total of 13 charges were laid against the traveller, which include three counts of Fail to Report Imported Goods, three counts of Smuggling and one count of Making False Statements under the Customs Act, as well as two counts of Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm, two counts of Possession of a Loaded Prohibited Firearm and two counts of Careless Transportation of a Firearm under the Criminal Code. His next court appearance is scheduled for June 2, 2017, in Brockville, Ontario.
On May, 9, 2017, a 26-year-old resident of North Carolina sought entry to Canada to attend a funeral. He was referred for a secondary examination, during which officers discovered a rifle round in the door of his vehicle. Upon further examination, officers also discovered a firearm and a loaded magazine under the back seat.
The traveller was arrested and charged with Fail to Report Imported Goods, Making False Statements, Evading Compliance and Smuggling under the Customs Act, as well as Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm, Possession of a Loaded Weapon and Careless Transportation of a Firearm under the Criminal Code. His next court appearance is scheduled for June 30, 2017, in Brockville, Ontario.
KTPAFlyer wrote:nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US."
This is definitely not a surprise. Any chance she was flying from MSP?
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... tems-minn/
nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US. Anyway, she's 60+ so I'd imagine that she'll probably just get a slap on the wrist...
http://www.newsweek.com/us-woman-dumps- ... can-633130
Article quote:
"For one U.S. citizen in her 60s, that something was 100 live bullets. Aftering arriving at Tokyo’s International Haneda Airport Wednesday with her husband to transfer to a flight to Southeast Asia, she noticed the bullets were in her bag and dumped them in a trash can, Japan Times reported. Police arrested the woman, who has not yet been named, on suspicion of bringing 100 live bullets into to the country, which is in violation of Japan’s Firearm And Sword Control Law."
CO953 wrote:Very interesting. A couple months ago on a thread where someone asked about transporting firearms, I described something like this happening to me.
At LAX back about 2004 I was at the ticketing counter checking in and while reaching into my backpack for the printed itinerary I discovered a single stray bullet in the pocket which had somehow become folded into a seam due to a gap in the stitching. I immediately declared it to the ticketing agent (it was United Airlines if I recall correctly) and asked what I should do. She said that it was up to me ..... As I had been dropped off - had no ride or vehicle- I asked if the airport had a disposal procedure or whether I should throw it in a trash can or what? The agent repeated her non-response. I was not too happy because it was not that long after 9/11 and I figured that the airports should have some sort of procedure. I would have been happy to wait a few minutes and turn it over to an airport policeman or something.
Faced with the unhelpful non-response, and not being in a position to transport myself out of the airport, I simply walked to the curb and dropped it into a trash can, then returned to the counter and checked in.
With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight, if they immediately declare the mistake. There has to be some room still reserved for the human factor in air travel, and the occasional human mistake. Same thing applies to anyone not aware of New York's repeated (unconstitutional) detention of passengers who have legally checked a firearm in another state of flight origin and then transited through a New York airport on the way to somewhere else and been ambushed by police during the stop-over. This violates the transit protections of the Commerce clause of the Constitution that allows your Pennsylvania driver's license, for example, to be valid for driving through Wyoming on a vacation. It should apply to a passenger in transit, but of course certain American states nowadays feel free to make their own laws just like in 1861.
I hope that the situation in Japan will be solved sensibly and quickly. Every man-hour applied to something like this detracts from man-hours applied to true threats......
FlyHappy wrote:I love this story for nothing more than the "Firearm And Sword Control Law" ! So cool, and feudal and just plain Japanese !
smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
kimimm19 wrote:KTPAFlyer wrote:nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US."
This is definitely not a surprise. Any chance she was flying from MSP?
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... tems-minn/
An absolute disgrace, especially TSA's response on the matter.
Andy33 wrote:I really don't see why, given the US imposes (for good biosecurity reasons) restrictions on what I can bring into the USA and exacts penalties if I don't follow the correct procedure, which I'm expected to know or find out for myself, other countries can't impose (in the interests of the safety of their citizens) restrictions on what can be taken into their country, and impose penalties if they fail to follow the correct procedure. This lady certainly didn't walk up to a Japanese customs officer and say that she'd accidentally brought the bullets with her, which would certainly have avoided most of the trouble she found herself in.
mjoelnir wrote:smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
It is banned, simple. It is not different from taking your stash of marijuana travelling.
KTPAFlyer wrote:nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US."
This is definitely not a surprise. Any chance she was flying from MSP?
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... tems-minn/
CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight, if they immediately declare the mistake.
I hope that the situation in Japan will be solved sensibly and quickly. Every man-hour applied to something like this detracts from man-hours applied to true threats......
smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
QueenoftheSkies wrote:nitepilot79 wrote:I'm kind of surprised 100 bullets made it through security leaving the US. Anyway, she's 60+ so I'd imagine that she'll probably just get a slap on the wrist...
http://www.newsweek.com/us-woman-dumps- ... can-633130
Article quote:
"For one U.S. citizen in her 60s, that something was 100 live bullets. Aftering arriving at Tokyo’s International Haneda Airport Wednesday with her husband to transfer to a flight to Southeast Asia, she noticed the bullets were in her bag and dumped them in a trash can, Japan Times reported. Police arrested the woman, who has not yet been named, on suspicion of bringing 100 live bullets into to the country, which is in violation of Japan’s Firearm And Sword Control Law."
Imagine again. Japan is very strict with this sort of thing and the fact is she didn't voluntarily turn them over. She tried to get away with it by disposing of them. Knee jerk reaction? Sure but nonetheless doesn't paint an old "innocent" lady picture.
777PHX wrote:Yeah, ok. I don't think a 60 year old lady who inadvertently left some cartridges in her bag is public enemy number one. She still would have been charged if she had turned them over so she had nothing to lose by trying to dump them.
johns624 wrote:This leads me to believe that Haneda must have some pretty good high definition closed circuit TV cameras in operation. If she didn't notice the weight, it must have been 22 rimfire. That's why I never use my range bags for traveling or vice versa.
smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
777PHX wrote:
Yeah, ok. I don't think a 60 year old lady who inadvertently left some cartridges in her bag is public enemy number one. She still would have been charged if she had turned them over so she had nothing to lose by trying to dump them.
Armodeen wrote:smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
Dead drop them in the bin for some unsavory character to collect later. This might have been an innocent mistake, but you have to come down hard to prevent the less innocent from trying their hand.
CO953 wrote:Armodeen wrote:smokeybandit wrote:What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
Dead drop them in the bin for some unsavory character to collect later. This might have been an innocent mistake, but you have to come down hard to prevent the less innocent from trying their hand.
I had this exact thought back in '04 at LAX as I discarded my single bullet I found in a backpack pocket in a curbside trash can. I was innocent, but I could see a bad actor doing something else. Which is why I think that some procedure should be put in place, worldwide, to consider airports an "amnesty" zone - in which travelers who have mistakenly transported a weapon or ammunition from a place where it was allowed to a place where it wasn't allowed, are allowed to throw a "flag" on themselves and immediately declare the mistake to security. Accidental transportation does happen, and I see no benefit in spending security resources in prosecuting someone who immediately in good faith owns up.
(Obviously, to prevent abuse and to prevent temptation for security to collude with a bad actor, some database record would have to be kept of the mistake so that an individual would not be allowed to repeatedly make such "mistakes" without consequence.)
CO953 wrote:Regarding the posts upthread about crossing into Canada with firearms: (Sorry, the quote feature somehow isn't working for me):
I wonder if Canadian entry law has changed since 1999? I was traveling alone by car on an extended sightseeing trip, which is why I had a pistol with me for personal protection (America is very VERY large, and there are plenty of lonely roads which have no cell service or any hope of assistance in an emergency, which makes a legal weapon as sensible as packing extra radiator hoses and fan belts.)
I ended up touring the Olympic Peninsula in far northwestern Washington state, and stayed overnight in Port Angeles, which is a ferry ride away from Vancouver Island. I really, REALLY wanted to take the ferry to Victoria, B.C., as I had already toured the San Juan Islands that week. However, I had researched Canadian law, and I could not find any legal way to bring my legal firearm with me on the ferry, even in a locked case in my trunk., and read some severe warnings of vehicle inspections and what would happen were I caught. I wished there were at least something simple like some rentable lockers at the ferry terminal. However, I could figure out no way to visit Victoria without resorting to something like digging a hole in the woods off a Washington-state back road and temporarily leaving the weapon there as I toured Vancouver Island.
Does Canada now allow entry of firearms by sea or by air at all?
CO953 wrote:Very interesting. A couple months ago on a thread where someone asked about transporting firearms, I described something like this happening to me.
At LAX back about 2004 I was at the ticketing counter checking in and while reaching into my backpack for the printed itinerary I discovered a single stray bullet in the pocket which had somehow become folded into a seam due to a gap in the stitching. I immediately declared it to the ticketing agent (it was United Airlines if I recall correctly) and asked what I should do. She said that it was up to me ..... As I had been dropped off - had no ride or vehicle- I asked if the airport had a disposal procedure or whether I should throw it in a trash can or what? The agent repeated her non-response. I was not too happy because it was not that long after 9/11 and I figured that the airports should have some sort of procedure. I would have been happy to wait a few minutes and turn it over to an airport policeman or something.
Faced with the unhelpful non-response, and not being in a position to transport myself out of the airport, I simply walked to the curb and dropped it into a trash can, then returned to the counter and checked in.
With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight, if they immediately declare the mistake. There has to be some room still reserved for the human factor in air travel, and the occasional human mistake. Same thing applies to anyone not aware of New York's repeated (unconstitutional) detention of passengers who have legally checked a firearm in another state of flight origin and then transited through a New York airport on the way to somewhere else and been ambushed by police during the stop-over. This violates the transit protections of the Commerce clause of the Constitution that allows your Pennsylvania driver's license, for example, to be valid for driving through Wyoming on a vacation. It should apply to a passenger in transit, but of course certain American states nowadays feel free to make their own laws just like in 1861.
I hope that the situation in Japan will be solved sensibly and quickly. Every man-hour applied to something like this detracts from man-hours applied to true threats......
spacecadet wrote:In Japan, a person carrying 100 live bullets around is considered a major threat to public safety. It would be like somebody walking around with a baggie full of anthrax at JFK Airport, dumping it in the middle of the terminal, then claiming ignorance when they were arrested. We would (rightly) tell that person that we really don't care if they knew our laws or not - if they didn't, they should have.
Natflyer wrote:I guess the lady never thought her purse was on the heavy side? I know my wife would'nt notice if I put a brick into one of her gargantuan purses (aka black holes)...
c933103 wrote:Instead of telling every other countries in the world to setup a special policy to accomodate travellers from relatively minor portion of the world which are used to guns and have lax security check that caused troubles everywhere, I think it would be easier if those countries tries to tighten its security measures.
CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world,
VSMUT wrote:CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world,
What do you mean with "many and conflicting"? There are only 2 ways across the world when it comes to guns, the guns/ammuntion forbidden places, and the US+Somalia. Pretty much the entire world has agreed not to go the American way when it comes to guns.
bgm wrote:VSMUT wrote:CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world,
What do you mean with "many and conflicting"? There are only 2 ways across the world when it comes to guns, the guns/ammuntion forbidden places, and the US+Somalia. Pretty much the entire world has agreed not to go the American way when it comes to guns.
Clearly the rest of the world isn't as enlightened as the US and Somalia when it comes to firearms and ammunition.
VSMUT wrote:CO953 wrote:With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world,
What do you mean with "many and conflicting"? There are only 2 ways across the world when it comes to guns, the guns/ammuntion forbidden places, and the US+Somalia. Pretty much the entire world has agreed not to go the American way when it comes to guns.
johns624 wrote:This leads me to believe that Haneda must have some pretty good high definition closed circuit TV cameras in operation. If she didn't notice the weight, it must have been 22 rimfire. That's why I never use my range bags for traveling or vice versa.
LamboAston wrote:Other places around the world, pistols aren't even legal to own (New Zealand), and shooting injuries are far lower per 100,000 people.
smokeybandit wrote:
What threat are the bullets? She going to throw them at people?
CO953 wrote:Yes they do. They are quite restricted, though. Rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes have to be declared on entry. Handguns are much harder. You must be at least a seasonal resident and have a Canadian firearms ownership license (PAL). You might also be able to get in if you are going to an official target competition and have paperwork proving it. It's something that has to be planned well ahead of time. Your best bet, if you are ever in that situation again, is to find a local gun dealer who will take your gun in for "cleaning".Regarding the posts upthread about crossing into Canada with firearms: (Sorry, the quote feature somehow isn't working for me):
Does Canada now allow entry of firearms by sea or by air at all?
rbavfan wrote:CO953 wrote:Very interesting. A couple months ago on a thread where someone asked about transporting firearms, I described something like this happening to me.
At LAX back about 2004 I was at the ticketing counter checking in and while reaching into my backpack for the printed itinerary I discovered a single stray bullet in the pocket which had somehow become folded into a seam due to a gap in the stitching. I immediately declared it to the ticketing agent (it was United Airlines if I recall correctly) and asked what I should do. She said that it was up to me ..... As I had been dropped off - had no ride or vehicle- I asked if the airport had a disposal procedure or whether I should throw it in a trash can or what? The agent repeated her non-response. I was not too happy because it was not that long after 9/11 and I figured that the airports should have some sort of procedure. I would have been happy to wait a few minutes and turn it over to an airport policeman or something.
Faced with the unhelpful non-response, and not being in a position to transport myself out of the airport, I simply walked to the curb and dropped it into a trash can, then returned to the counter and checked in.
With so many conflicting and overlapping weapons laws across the world, I don't approve of anyone being detained or charged for an an honest oversight, if they immediately declare the mistake. There has to be some room still reserved for the human factor in air travel, and the occasional human mistake. Same thing applies to anyone not aware of New York's repeated (unconstitutional) detention of passengers who have legally checked a firearm in another state of flight origin and then transited through a New York airport on the way to somewhere else and been ambushed by police during the stop-over. This violates the transit protections of the Commerce clause of the Constitution that allows your Pennsylvania driver's license, for example, to be valid for driving through Wyoming on a vacation. It should apply to a passenger in transit, but of course certain American states nowadays feel free to make their own laws just like in 1861.
I hope that the situation in Japan will be solved sensibly and quickly. Every man-hour applied to something like this detracts from man-hours applied to true threats......
You dropped a live bullet into a trash can. I would say that is the wrong thing to do. So no regard for gun safety on your part. You should know better as a gun owner. You should have "bit the bullet and told security what happened and asked them to despose of it safely.
LamboAston wrote:bgm wrote:VSMUT wrote:
What do you mean with "many and conflicting"? There are only 2 ways across the world when it comes to guns, the guns/ammuntion forbidden places, and the US+Somalia. Pretty much the entire world has agreed not to go the American way when it comes to guns.
Clearly the rest of the world isn't as enlightened as the US and Somalia when it comes to firearms and ammunition.
More like the rest of the world has more than a grain of sense in their heads. Other places around the world, pistols aren't even legal to own (New Zealand), and shooting injuries are far lower per 100,000 people. Maybe the US and Somalia aren't as enlightened as the rest of the world when it comes to firearm safety and ownership
CO953 wrote:LamboAston wrote:bgm wrote:
Clearly the rest of the world isn't as enlightened as the US and Somalia when it comes to firearms and ammunition.
More like the rest of the world has more than a grain of sense in their heads. Other places around the world, pistols aren't even legal to own (New Zealand), and shooting injuries are far lower per 100,000 people. Maybe the US and Somalia aren't as enlightened as the rest of the world when it comes to firearm safety and ownership
Maybe some of we Americans are enlightened as to the fact that the police are only minutes away when seconds count to save your life. You'd think that with the mass killings going on around the world where not one citizen has a weapon to protect themselves and others, that self-satisfied smug people might start taking another look at the height of their horses.... and asking themselves exactly what is enlightened about surrendering the right to self-defense.
johns624 wrote:CO953 wrote:Yes they do. They are quite restricted, though. Rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes have to be declared on entry. Handguns are much harder. You must be at least a seasonal resident and have a Canadian firearms ownership license (PAL). You might also be able to get in if you are going to an official target competition and have paperwork proving it. It's something that has to be planned well ahead of time. Your best bet, if you are ever in that situation again, is to find a local gun dealer who will take your gun in for "cleaning".Regarding the posts upthread about crossing into Canada with firearms: (Sorry, the quote feature somehow isn't working for me):
Does Canada now allow entry of firearms by sea or by air at all?
CO953 wrote:LamboAston wrote:bgm wrote:
Clearly the rest of the world isn't as enlightened as the US and Somalia when it comes to firearms and ammunition.
More like the rest of the world has more than a grain of sense in their heads. Other places around the world, pistols aren't even legal to own (New Zealand), and shooting injuries are far lower per 100,000 people. Maybe the US and Somalia aren't as enlightened as the rest of the world when it comes to firearm safety and ownership
Maybe some of we Americans are enlightened as to the fact that the police are only minutes away when seconds count to save your life. You'd think that with the mass killings going on around the world where not one citizen has a weapon to protect themselves and others, that self-satisfied smug people might start taking another look at the height of their horses.... and asking themselves exactly what is enlightened about surrendering the right to self-defense.
CO953 wrote:LamboAston wrote:bgm wrote:
Clearly the rest of the world isn't as enlightened as the US and Somalia when it comes to firearms and ammunition.
More like the rest of the world has more than a grain of sense in their heads. Other places around the world, pistols aren't even legal to own (New Zealand), and shooting injuries are far lower per 100,000 people. Maybe the US and Somalia aren't as enlightened as the rest of the world when it comes to firearm safety and ownership
Maybe some of we Americans are enlightened as to the fact that the police are only minutes away when seconds count to save your life. You'd think that with the mass killings going on around the world where not one citizen has a weapon to protect themselves and others, that self-satisfied smug people might start taking another look at the height of their horses.... and asking themselves exactly what is enlightened about surrendering the right to self-defense.