— U.S. -, -, 113 S.Ct. 2050, 2054, 124 L.Ed.2d 138 (1993). For example, Congress could have drafted the statute to read: Whoever uses fire or an explosive to commit any arson which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States shall be sentenced to imprisonment for five years. Congress chose not to do so. Instead, Congress chose to punish those who use fire to commit any felony. That dictate applies to the facts of this case. The defendants used fire to burn two crosses in order to commit the felony of violating the civil rights of the inhabitants of the house. 18 U.S.C. § 241. Accordingly, we find the language of section 844(h)(1) to be clear and unambiguous and the statute applicable to the facts of this case. Cf. United States v. Worthy, 915 F.2d 1514, 1516-17 (11th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); accord United States v. Gresser, 935 F.2d 96,
holding that the rule of lenity applies to sentencing guidelines holding that arson of an owneroccupied residence not used for any commercial purpose does not qualify as property used in commerce and is not subject to federal prosecution under federal arson statute holding that pre1990 sentencing guidelines section 2k14b4use of fire or explosives to commit a federal felonyis not restricted to arson crimes and applies to cross burnings designed to interfere with anothers civil rights holding that blakely does not apply to the federal sentencing guidelines holding that the bankruptcy code does not interfere with criminal sentencing schemes