Offshore Worker Imprisoned for Firearm Smuggling Attempt

An offshore worker who sought to import a gun into the country, citing a desire to be a “naughty boy,” has been sentenced to five years in prison. The High Court in Glasgow heard that David McGregor, of Leith in Edinburgh, was apprehended after US law enforcement intercepted a package last year. The parcel was found to contain an item described as electrical, with a “good condition” working handgun concealed within. The shipment was addressed to the 50-year-old’s former partner in Dundee, and the court was informed that McGregor had previously told her he intended to acquire a weapon to “keep her safe” while he was employed offshore. Authorities confiscated the package on 5 June 2023 before it was dispatched to Scotland, with the firearm removed. Prosecutors stated that McGregor’s ex-partner was also questioned regarding the parcel sent to her residence. She maintained she had no knowledge of a gun actually being ordered but recounted that McGregor had been “adamant” about remaining at the property one morning to receive a package. It is understood she conveyed to him that it was a “stupid thing” and that she “did not need anything like that.” An examination of McGregor’s phone revealed he had conducted online searches for 9mm handguns, their cost, and payment methods. He had purchased a Sig Sauer 365XL through the Telegram messaging app. Jurors heard that McGregor had indicated in text messages that “he would probably make further orders in the future” and had inquired about the availability of a Walther PDP gun. Payment for the weapon was processed via PayPal. McGregor admitted guilt to attempting to acquire and possess the firearm. He declared: “I admit it. It was nosiness. You know there is nothing in it. I just wanted to be a bit of a naughty boy.” Subsequently, he alleged he had been “ripped off.” Euan Gosney, representing the defense, stated that McGregor’s life circumstances at the time were “utterly chaotic,” with various aspects “unravelling.” Mr. Gosney asserted that “no rational explanation” could be offered to the court and that “it was evident something was going to come to a head at some point.” Judge Lord Scott indicated he was convinced that a sentence exceeding the minimum five-year term was unnecessary.