Carlas Watson appeals her convictions on drug and weapon charges. She argues that she did not violate 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 because she did not knowingly or intentionally attempt to possess with intent to distributе cocaine base, that she did not violate 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) because she did not use a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, and that the district court 1 erred in giving certain jury instructions.
We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 2, 1990, two drug couriers, Estella Mosley and Estella Bell, were stopped in Los Angeles as they attempted to board the Amtrak train for Kansas City, Missouri. A consensual search of Mosley’s suitcase revealed two kilograms of cocaine base (crack) with a street vаlue of $200,000. Subsequently, Mosley and Bell cooperated with Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents and, after being flown to Kansas City, conducted a controlled delivery of the cocaine bearing suitcase. On June 4, 1990, the Amtrak train from Los Angeles arrived in Kansas City. Mosley and Bell mingled with the crowd departing from the Los Angeles train. Soon thereafter, Frank Peerman approached Mosley and took her suitcase. Special Agent Wammach, DEA, then stopped and arrested Peerman.
Meanwhile, DEA Special Agent Hicks observed Watson circling the area watching Peerman and Agent Wammach. Agent Hicks approached Watson and after identifying himself engaged her in conversation. After learning that Watson had driven to the train station with Peerman to pick up two ladies, Agent Hicks conducted a consensual search of Watson’s automobile. The search revealed a loaded .22 caliber revolver under the front seat and $6,340 in cash in the glove compartment. Watson stated that the gun was hеrs and the cash was Peerman’s. At that point Watson was arrested. Watson then agreed to let the police search her one bedroom residence where she lived with Peerman. The searсh revealed a loaded AK-47 assault rifle underneath the bed. No drugs or cash were found.
Thereafter, Watson was indicted on four counts. On November 9, 1990, following a jury trial, Watson was convicted on Count Two; attempting to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and on Count Three; using a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). 2 Watson was *408 sentenced to a totаl of 211 months imprisonment and fined $15,400.
II. DISCUSSION
A. Sufficiency of the Evidence
At the close of all evidence, the trial judge denied Watson’s motion for judgment of acquittal. Watson insists that the presiding judge erred in denying the motion because there was insufficiеnt evidence to sustain convictions on Counts Two and Three.
In reviewing an insufficiency of the evidence claim, “we examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, giving it the benefit of all reasonable inferences.”
United States v. Duke,
Watson was convicted of attempting to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base. The relevant statute provides thаt “it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to ... possess with intent to ... distribute ... a controlled substance.” 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Further, any person who attempts to commit this offense is subject to the same penalty рrescribed for the offense. 21 U.S.C. § 846.
The requisite elements of an attempt crime are “(1) an intent to engage in criminal conduct, and (2) conduct constituting a ‘substantial step’ towards the commission of the substаntive offense which strongly corroborates the actor’s criminal intent.”
United States v. Joyce,
Here, the evidence at trial pointed to Watson’s participation in previous drug shipments. Mosley’s daughter testified that on one occasion Watson picked up a package of cocaine from her for delivery to Peerman. Further, Mosley’s other daughter testified that on one occasion Watson picked her up at the airport and took her to Watson’s residence during a cocaine delivery. Also, Watson admitted to Agent Hicks thаt Peerman kept cocaine base in the refrigerator at her house and sold drugs out of her house. The record also shows that when Watson was initially questioned at the train station, she claimed tо have traveled there by bus when in fact she had driven. Given this evidence, a reasonable minded jury could find that Watson intended to possess cocaine base for purposes of distribution and that she took a substantial step toward the commission of that crime.
Watson was also convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking crime. The relevant statute provides that “[whoever, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime ... uses or carries a firearm, shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such ... drug trafficking crime, be sentenced to imprisonment for five years.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). 3
The offense оf using a firearm requires a predicate drug trafficking crime. 4 Here, Watson has been convicted of a drug trafficking offense; attempted possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. 5 How *409 ever, Watson maintains that the evidence was insufficient to establish “use” of a firearm “during and in relation to” her drug trafficking crime.
The government need not show that Watson was in actual physical possession of the firearm, or that she brandished or discharged it.
United States v. Curry,
In the case sub judice, DEA agents found the .22 caliber revolver under the driver’s seat of Watson’s сar, which she had driven to the train station for the purpose of picking up drugs. The car also contained $6,340 in cash. Peerman, carrying the drugs, was prepared to leave the train station with Watson fоr the car when stopped. The firearm was in a position to safeguard the drugs and cash and possibly to assist an escape. The presence and availability of the .22 revolver facilitated Watson’s drug trafficking crime.
See United States v. LaGuardia,
The AK-47 was found underneath the bed in Watson’s home. While no drugs or cash were found in the home at the time of the search, the evidence showed that drugs had been stored in Watson’s refrigerator and sold from her home. Watson contends that such evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction as to the AK-47. We disagree. The house had been established as a drug storage and distribution point. AK-47’s are not the average layperson’s preferred weapon for emergency defense.
Section 924(c)(1) prohibits the use of
a
firearm. While Watson might have been convicted of two violations of section 924(c)(1) because she used two firearms,
United States v. Freisinger,
B. Jury Instructions
Watson next contends that the district court committed plain error in giving Instructions Nine, Ten, Eleven and Twelve. Watson fаiled to object to any of the instructions at trial. The failure to make a timely and specific objection to the instructions “results in waiver of objection on appeal.”
United States v. Young,
Instruction Nine defined the three essential elements of the offense of attempted possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Instruction Ten advised
*410
the jury that they could convict Watson of that сrime if she aided and abetted its commission.
6
The term “attempt” was not defined in either instruction and as a result, Watson claims, the jury was not instructed on an element of the offense. Watson points to the dеfinition of attempt in the Model Criminal Jury Instructions for the Eighth Circuit, § 8.01. However, those instructions are not binding on the district courts.
United States v. Norton,
Instruction Eleven required the jury to find that Watson “knowingly used firearms.” The verdict form referred to the use of a firearm. As discussed above, the jury finding that Watson used both firearms encompasses the finding of a use of one firearm. Accordingly, Watson’s argument is without merit.
For the foregoing reasons, the convictions are affirmed.
Notes
. The Honorable Elmo B. Hunter, Seniоr United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
. Watson was acquitted on Count One; conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and on Count Four; allowing her residence to be used for purposes of distributing cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856. Peerman *408 was tried as a codefendant and was convicted on Counts One, Two, and Three.
. The indictment chargеd Watson with “using" rather than “using or carrying” firearms. Consequently, the United States was required to prove that Watson used firearms.
. The term “drug trafficking crime” includes any felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801 еt seq. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(2).
.Count Three charged Watson with using firearms during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense, “that is, the offense of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute ... as alleged in Count One.” In addition, Instruction Eleven required the jury, in order to convict Watson of using a firearm, to find that she "committed the *409 crime of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute.”
As noted, Watson was convicted of using a firearm during and in relation to the crime of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute. yet was acquitted of that predicate offense. Nevertheless, the inconsistent verdict will be reviewed only for sufficiency of the evidence.
See United States v. Powell,
. One who aids or abets the commission of an offense against the United States is punishable as a principal. 18 U.S.C. § 2.