"Do you honestly think every police officer needs a gun when 95% of the crimes they respond to are non-violent?"
You really are clueless, aren't you?
Do you have a smoke detector in your home? Does your car have a jack or other provision for dealing with a flat tire? Do you have a box of band-aids? Do you have insurance?
Why do you have any of those things? You probably seldom, if ever, use them but you have them in case you need them - because you never can tell when that need might arise.
Cops carry guns because of that 5% you mentioned. Since there's no way to predict an outcome before arriving on-scene, you carry the gun to all the calls to which you respond.
Brandishing a firearm is a specific type of act and it's illegal in every state in the union. Carrying a firearm is not the same as brandishing one and calling it brandishing doesn't make it brandishing.
I personally prefer carrying a handgun openly in a proper holster. It's much more comfortable. That it might upset you is your problem, not mine, and I have no intention of allowing you to make it my problem.
It will probably upset you no end to learn that 31 states allow their residents of legal age to openly carry a handgun without a permit. 16 of those states also allow concealed carry without a permit. It might surprise you to learn that the average homicide rate in those 16 states is lower than the average of states like California with strong gun laws. In fact, most of the states with the lowest homicide rates are permitless carry states, most with high rates of gun ownership.
I think our system of criminal law should be focused exclusively on acts that cause actual harm to another person. If we stopped trying to legislate morality, we could have space in prisons for the people that really need to be there, free up police and judicial resources, and generally be better off. How many of the bad things connected with victimless crime exist because they are crimes?