Under this “otherwise” clause, every crime is considered a risk of physical injury to a person, regardless of what it was. The federal courts call every conviction of larceny,a violent felony, pick-pocketing or purse snatching and enhance the sentence to 15 to life. It makes no difference what you stole or how you stole it, is in their opinion still pick-pocketing. and does not count what the state sentenced you to. That one year is useless and is never allowed as a defense against enhanced sentence.
the only conviction that is considered non violent is a DUI.

18 U.S.C. §924(e)(2)(B) defines “violent felony” as a violent crime that is “punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year”

You left out a very important part of the statute which enumerates specific crimes punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. It’s not just simply any crime that is punishable by imprisonment excedding one year. See below.

(i) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use ofphysical force against the person of another; or

(ii) is burglary, arson, or extortion, involves use of explosives, orotherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk ofphysical injury to another .

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/07/when_do_judges.html

The Section 921(a)(33) point raises the interesting issue of whether Congress can retroactively affect the interpretation of the unamended portions of a statute when it later amends the statute. That seems potentially problematic to me, although perhaps not where the issue is whether the earlier results are “absurd.”