Court has categorized kidnapping as a crime of violence. See, e.g., United States v. Rodriguez-Moreno, 526 U.S. 275, 280, 119 S.Ct. 1239, 143 L.Ed.2d 388 (1999). 11 . Any argument regarding a religious exception has been addressed in the first section of this Opinion relating to the RFRA. 12 . The Court takes judicial notice that Maimonides was an influential figure in the Jewish religion, who has had a profound impact on Jewish law, philosophy, and religious consciousness. 13 . I note that there is some indication by other courts of appeal, including the Fourth Circuit in Childress, that the requirement that a kidnapped person be held "for ransom or reward or otherwise” is not even an element of the federal kidnapping offense. United States v. Martell, 335 F.2d 764, 766 (4th Cir.1964) (<HOLDING>); Gawne v. United States, 409 F.2d 1399,
holding that a defendant is in custody and miranda applies even when the purpose of defendants detention is unrelated to the purpose of the interrogation holding that the federal kidnapping statute is violated regardless of the ultimate purpose of the kidnapper holding that to violate a specific intent statute the defendant must act with the purpose of violating the law holding that the donovan rule applies regardless of whether the injunction is issued before or after the federal court filing holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute