The other argument against the hate crimes enhancement is that you can't hand down a harsher penalty than capital murder. That may be true. But we have to recognize that not all hate crimes are homicides. They come in many forms, such as assaults, or defacing places of worship or personal property with symbols such as swastikas. If Utah doesn't deal effectively with lesser hate-crime offenders, why would someone bent on hate stop at pamphleting a neighborhood with racist fliers? Former New York Mayor Rudy Guiliani's "broken window" philosophy on fighting crime comes to mind.

As a practical matter, there likely won't be that many criminal cases where the hate crimes sentencing enhancement would apply. But prosecutors and members of the state Sentencing Commission want the option when the evidence and facts can support enhanced penalties.

There are many examples in Utah law where people convicted of crimes against people with a particular status or a certain motive are held to harsher punishments. For instance, the code singles out certain crimes against elected officials. That would render legislators a special class, right? If they're concerned about enhanced penalties, shouldn't they — as a matter of fairness — repeal the sections of the criminal code that apply to them?

I'm not saying they should. Quite the contrary. Anyone who threatens, assault or kills a public official deserves more time behind bars because we value the orderly administration of our government.

A sentencing enhancement for hate crimes is another opportunity for our laws to reflect our collective values and to make the statement that hate is not welcome in Utah. For those who commit crimes based on hate, our collective value system demands that the punishment fit the crime.

---

Marjorie Cortez is a Deseret Morning News editorial writer. E-mail her at marjorie@desnews.com