Originally Posted by
Bikewer
Often, the add-on penalties for "armed criminal action" are used as a bargaining chip by prosecutors.
"Cop to the robbery, and we'll drop the ACA charge."
A conviction is obtained, the robber gets less time, everybody happy. But little incentive to avoid being armed.
Armed criminal types tend to be by category, in my experience. We essentially never find folks indulging in petty crime like bicycle theft or thefts from offices or shoplifters going about armed.
However, people who are involved in the drug trade, gang members, robbery suspects, are very frequently armed.
These people live in a violent world, and are not only concerned with intimidating potential victims but being attacked by rival gang members or having "deals" go south or whatever.
It's part of the criminal culture and has been so for a very long time.
I know that of the 7 or 8 drug dealers we charged in the grand jury I was on, none of them also had weapons charges, and this would have been outside of any deal by the prosecutor because the prosecutor would want as many charges as possible to threaten them with and by not bringing weapons charges those would be removed by the prosecutor before a deal. So it makes no sense.
So maybe the dealers who carry guns cut a deal before it gets to the grand jury but it does seem to not add up for around where I am.