The touchstone of "violence” in the career offender provisions is the risk that physical injury will result, rather than the risk that physical force will be used in the commission of the crime. As the BIA noted in In re Sweetser, 22 I. & N. Dec. at 709, "[a]t first blush, the difference in phrasing between 18 U.S.C. § 16 and U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(l)(ii) appears trivial because most physical injury or harm comes from the use of physical force. However, ‘the use of physical force' is an act committed by a criminal defendant, while the 'risk of physical injury’ is a consequence of the defendant's acts.” Bearing that distinction in mind, in the context for which we rely on Wood, we find the reasoning of the Court to be persuasive. See also United States v. Pierce, 278 F.3d 282 (4th Cir.2002)(<HOLDING>). 27 . While it might appear unnecessary to
holding that taking indecent liberties with a child is not a lesser included offense of statutory rape given the differing age elements holding that reduced career offender status was nonetheless based the career offender guidelines holding that virginia conviction for unlawful wounding qualified as a crime of violence under the career offender guidelines residual clause holding that the state felony offense of taking indecent liberties with a child categorically constituted a crime of violence for purposes of the career offender sentencing guidelines holding that the defendant did not need to have physically touched the victim in order to be convicted of taking indecent liberties with a child in violation of ncgs  142021a2