text: luna argument does not reassure us.we agree that state counterparts of some enumerated federal offenses would qualify as aggravated felonies through the crime of violence provision.but not nearly all such offenses,and not even the worst ones.consider again some of the listed offenses described earlier.see supra,at.the crime of violence provision would not pick up demanding a ransom for kidnapping.see a defining the crime without any reference to physical force.it would not cover most of the listed child pornography offenses,involving the distribution,receipt,and possession of such materials.it would not reach laws and other firearms offenses.and indeed,it would not reach arson in the many states defining that crime to include the destruction of one own property.see jordison gonzales,holding that a violation of california arson statute does not count as a crime of violence for that reason tr.of oral arg.solicitor general agreeing with that interpretation so under luna reading,state and foreign counterparts to a broad swath of listed statutes would remain outside a coverage merely because they lack an explicit interstate commerce connection.and for all the reasons discussed above,that result would significantly restrict the penultimate sentence force and effect,and in an utterly random manner 