If defendant used a replica gun rather than an operable firearm, does this constitute a circumstance in aggravation within the meaning of rule 4.421(a)(2)?

However, even if defendant used a replica gun rather than an operable firearm, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that defendant was armed with or used a weapon within the meaning of rule 4.421(a)(2). We agree with the Attorney General that the use of a replica or inoperable weapon is a circumstance in aggravation within the meaning of rule 4.421(a)(2) when the victim believes the weapon is real. In such a case, whether operable or not, the weapon is being used "[t]o induce fearful compliance." (People v. Lewis (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 259, 265.)