increased the sentence based on the aggravated sexual abuse that occurred during the kidnapping. As previously stated, pursuant to § 2A3.1(b)(1), because the kidnapping offense was committed by means set forth in the aggravated sexual abuse statute, § 2241, Appellant’s sentence was increased four levels. Those means include, in relevant part, “using force against the victim [or by] threatening or placing the victim in fear that any person will be subject to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping.” § 2A3.1, cmt. n. 2. Appellant contends that the display of the gun was the force or threat of force used to commit the aggravated sexual abuse, and therefore the four-level increase should be prohibited as double counting. See United States v. Franks, 230 F.3d 811, 813-14 (5th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Katalinic, 510 F.3d 744, 748
holding that to apply the firearm enhancement the firearm need only reflect the context of the defendants possession and the defendants ability to use the firearm to promote the controlled substance offense holding that in a prosecution for possession of an unregistered firearm evidence of an armed robbery committed with the firearm was admissible holding that to enhance a sentence because of the defendants use of a firearm the jury must find the defendant guilty of a crime involving a firearm or otherwise specifically find that a firearm was used holding that an enhancement for an express threat of death may not be applied to the sentence for robbery when the threat is related to the use of the firearm and the defendant has a  924c sentence for the same firearm holding that threat occurring 36 days before possession of firearm not present threat