The gun was not shown or used, and was irrelevant to the actual crime committed.
Do you favor harsher sentences for speeders who carry a gun? Embezelling accountants who carry a gun? Tax evaders who carry a gun?
If the gun was not shown or used, no one would know he had it. The gun was not pulled. The gun was used to show what a tough guy the punk is to his customers. I'm not going to lose any sleep over the sentence.
Yes, if they are carrying illegally.
That is what this seems to indicate. Some liberals have expressed a hope that this is a way to go after guns in the hands of law abiders, to impose these min sentences on misdemeanor offenders, like speeders.
Interesting question. First, I am assuming we have illegal carry in your hypos, like the illegal carry of the drug dealer. I guess one distinction is whether or not the carrying of the gun is facilitates the illegal act. Drug dealers carry guns as part and parcel of of hawking their wares. Guns don't help tax evaders, speeders and embezellers commit their illegal acts. A clearer example would be the bank robber. He may not pull out his gun, but just inform the teller that he has one, and if someone confronts him, intended to pull the gun out, but nobody did, and he didn't.
Drawing distinctions and similarities, and finding distinctions in apparent similarities, and similarities in apparent differences, is the lawyer's stock in trade, and we love it.