.
Feedback

Deputies Living in Elk Grove Charged with Selling Guns Illegally

Law enforcement officials allegedly bought guns not available to the public, then re-sold them to gun dealers.

Two Sacramento County Sheriff's Department deputies living in Elk Grove have been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges they repeatedly sold to a gun dealer high-capacity guns not available to the public.

The felony charges against 31-year-old Ryan McGowan and 42-year-old Thomas Lu were announced Friday.

According to a press release, peace officers have access to "off-roster" guns with a higher capacity that aren't sold to the public. They're allowed to re-sell those "off-roster" guns, but can't make a business from repeatedly buying and selling them, according to a press release.

Since 2008, McGowan has purchased 41 handguns and sold 25 to private parties, according to the press release; Lu has bought 27 "off-roster" guns and sold 23, the press release states. United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner said both officers are charged with engaging in a firearms business without a license, while a gun dealer who allegedly bought from them and then re-sold the guns is charged with lying on a federal form asking “Are you actual buyer of this firearm(s) listed on the form?”

Robert Snellings, a 61-year-old Rancho Murieta resident, bought guns from the deputies, according to the press release. Sacramento resident Ulysses Simpson Grant Early IV, 36, allegedly purchased an "off-roster" gun from Snellings.

Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones said McGowan and Lu "disgraced" themselves and the department.

“Unfortunately, these two made the decision to abuse the authority that comes with the privilege of wearing a badge," Jones said in the press release. "Such conduct cannot–and will not–be tolerated."

Wagner also criticized the two deputies.

“When law enforcement officers misuse their badges to funnel dangerous weapons to the highest bidder, they compromise the safety of the public," the federal attorney said in the press release. "By putting personal profit ahead of public safety, they undermine the very essence of their duty."

The Sacramento Bee reported that both deputies were suspended: Lu has since quit while McGowan is trying to save his job.

public safety retiree June 2, 2012 at 12:00 pm
It IS legal in the secondary market for the public to purchase some types of firearms that only law enforcement or licensed dealers can initially buy. Subsequent configuration restrictions, such as a magazine not exceeding 10 rounds must be met, however. Other public restrictions exist, such as a roster listing of "safe" handguns. "Safe" guns to the public must meet a legislated artificial test standard AND the manufacturer PAYS the state for the privilege to sell in CA. Most other states have no secondary market like the legislature created in CA. So, a double standard exists-- gun control for the people (including military veterans), but not for government. What is a high capacity or high-powered firearm? State law does not define that. State law does not prohibit a law enforcement officer from reselling a restricted firearm through a dealer if it is subsequently configured for sale to a non-law enforcement person-- but not to exceed five transactions per year. The state wants to call that a loophole, but they are the ones who created this mess. It's was about gun control to the public while not wanting to discourage law enforcement officers who wanted to "upgun" for safety, but with government not willing to pay for it. So, now a legislator wants to eliminate that "mistake". In other words, the law enforcement person will pay out of his wages for a safety item the government should provide, but not allow for individual recovery of cost when no longer wanted.
Scooter June 2, 2012 at 08:03 pm
What a delusional rant ....
public safety retiree June 2, 2012 at 08:26 pm
A rant, yes. Educate yourself so as to not be ignorant.
Cody Kitaura (Editor) June 2, 2012 at 11:13 pm
Thanks for the comment. Do you think extra restrictions for public firearms (like limiting magazine size) do much to keep people (or law enforcement officers) safe? If not, is there something else that could be done?
Cody Kitaura (Editor) June 2, 2012 at 11:14 pm
Scooter, where do you stand on this issue? Obviously you disagree with the previous commenter, but I'd like to hear why.
public safety retiree June 3, 2012 at 01:52 am
Gun legislation in CA generally supports a divided class-- law enforcement from the general public. The legislature defines a "safe" handgun by restrictive features that can be sold to the to the public, separate from those saleable to law enforcement. Does that actually mean law enforcement buys "unsafe" handguns? Hardly. But that legislation did create a market (human nature being what it is) for civilians to seek to purchase resale guns from law officers, via legal federal transfer requirements. So now we have officers under market pressures navigating through onerous and arbitrary legalities, but getting entrapped-- and involuntarily terminated. Profit oversimplifies the motives. The practice is not isolated, and the fault falls back to legislators. Many other states do not have a roster, and do not distingush between what law enforcement and civilians can buy. One bullet in a handgun can be just as deadly as 10 or 30 if used with that intent, so a numerical restriction is arbitrary. How does that relate to safety? The public paid for recruitment, hiring, training, and retention of those officers, and now is paying for termination, prosecution, and incarceration. How many more before we, the public, wise up to the legislators?
Scooter June 3, 2012 at 04:59 am
The buying and reselling 40 plus handguns over the course of 4 years by one officer. How is that entrapment ? I read the attached federal indictment apparently you did not . And you call me ignorant .. LMAO ....
public safety retiree June 3, 2012 at 12:17 pm
Per this indictment, one officer faces charges pertaining to only one handgun. The other officer also faces charges pertaining to only one handgun. Neither handgun exceeds the 10-round limit from the factory. Two other unnamed officers allegedly in violation are not indicted (they are identified by name in other media reports). The indicted FFL is a former state DOJ employee (also reported elsewhere). Try realllly hard to see through this for the backstory, and consider the sources and the purpose for all the other information released for public consumption not included in the indictments. If more than 40 handguns were sold by one officer as you are led to believe, but that officer is charged with being inviolate with only one--- the problem lies where?? Or does this feed the bias? This is a conundrum of government at work-- administratively creating an issue that previously wasnt, trying to legislate a fix-- then failing that, passing it to the judiciary to clean it up because it's now entrapping its own. And who pays for all this?
Meg June 3, 2012 at 06:03 pm
It says there were eight comments I do not see 8?
Cody Kitaura (Editor) June 4, 2012 at 11:28 am
Hi Meg,
I see eight comments before yours, and nine including yours. Were you having problems with posting a comment? You can email me at cody.kitaura@patch.com if you were having technical issues with the site. Thanks!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Elk Grove Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Elk Grove Laguna Forums May 20, 2013 at 06:14 pm
Why not down to Grantline and then head back north along the freeway? Plus Kammerer will eventuallyRead More be widened all the way to I-5 and commuters can use that too. Take Grantline to Kammerer to Bruceville.
JJ Johnson May 21, 2013 at 04:15 pm
An overpass and off/on ramps will be built at Whitelock Parkway after the mall is built, whichRead More should take place after the soccer stadium is built, which should take place after the city secures a professional soccer team. Elk Grove better make sure the professional soccer team is a women's team, or else LaWanna Montgomery will be mad.
Christine Brainerd May 21, 2013 at 04:29 pm
Thanks for the suggestion. The City is currently studying a new interchange off 99 and Whitelock,Read More and the project is in our General Plan. We’re also updating the Elk Grove Blvd. onramp—currently one of the most outdated on 99 in the region. Work will begin this summer.
vicki green May 20, 2013 at 11:36 am
I was wondering the same thing! nothing on news or in the paper. What happened
Marty May 20, 2013 at 11:50 am
Perhaps this will explain..............Read More http://www.elkgroveonline.com/forums/topic/107176/several-cops-and-yellow-taped-ar
Cody Kitaura (Editor) May 20, 2013 at 12:04 pm
Thanks for asking, and for those quick responses, folks. I just posted a brief article on it here:Read More http://elkgrove.patch.com/groups/breaking-news/p/shots-fired-between-cars-on-bruceville-road-saturday