Fo' shizzle: a long sentence for Snoop Dogg?

A loyal reader spotlighted in an e-mail that the recent arrest of Snoop Dogg raises some interesting federal sentencing issues. I ask the reader to write up his thoughts.  Here they are:

The Washington Post reported on November 29, 2006, that Calvin Broadus, also known as "Snoop Dogg", and two members of his entourage were arrested for investigation of possessing a handgun and cocaine and transporting marijuana and having a false compartment in his vehicle. This arrest occurred as Snoop Dogg was leaving NBC Studios after performing on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.  (On November 29, 2006, Jay Leno joked about California's 10,000 strikes and your out policy in regards to Snoop Dogg's arrest). This arrest follows an arrest on October 26, 2006, at the Bob Hope Airport in Burbank, California, where police reported finding a gun and marijuana in his car.

In 1990, Snoop Dogg was convicted of possession of cocaine.  In July 1993, he was charged with possessing a gun.  Additionally, in August 1993, Snoop Dogg was charged with being an accomplice to a murder. It seems that someone fired shots from an automobile in which he was traveling; the shots resulted in a person's death.  In February 1996, Johnnie Cochran assisted Snoop Dogg at the murder trial; the jury found him not guilty of all but the charge of voluntary manslaughter, which the jury deadlock. In February 1997, he pleaded guilty to a state charge of being a felon in possession of a handgun.  For this offense he received three-years of probation and had to make anti-violence public announcements.  In October 2001, he pleaded guilty to possessing drug paraphernalia and possession of marijuana.

For you students of federal sentencing, what would the sentence be for Snoop Dogg pursuant to the United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (Nov. 2006), if he was charged with violating Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(1) ? 

For policy folks, to partially quote a famous weatherman, in my "neck of the woods," the ATF would have prosecuted Snoop Dogg a long time ago. Well, maybe not Snoop Dogg, but someone just like Snoop Dogg, but not famous, would have already been doing time or under indictment. 

As Snoop might say, "fo shizzle my dizzle!"  Why then, is he getting a pass?  Could it be that prosecuting Snoop Dogg would show to the broader public that there is a tremendous disparity between the sentences that are imposed at the state level versus the sentences imposed at the federal level?  Could it be that prosecuting Snoop Dogg would show how the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (test takers, do not look!) punish people for offenses that a jury has found them "not guilty" of committing?  Then, again, it could be that he is just getting a "phat" break.