There are sad occasions when Utah law isn't equipped to handle some of the cruelest acts. Take the state's animal cruelty law. Utah is one of nine states that does not have a felony provision for the torture of certain animals. It should.

Some acts of cruelty against animals are so egregious that prosecutors need a law that fits the crime. Until that happens, these offenses must be handled as misdemeanors, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500. Why not give prosecutors more latitude for the worst of the worst? One recent example was the torture inflicted upon Henry, a Chihuahua mix, who was blinded with a leaf blower and on another occasion, placed in a heated oven for five minutes. The abuser, Marc Christopher Vincent, was convicted of a Class A misdemeanor but sentenced to six months and fined $500. He was released from jail about two months early and ordered to get counseling.

State lawmakers considered a change in the law but reportedly failed due to a lack of time and misunderstanding about the bill. Now, Henry's owner, Vincent's former spouse, is lobbying Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. to place the bill on a special session call. Meanwhile, a new Dan Jones & Associates poll conducted for the Deseret Morning News and KSL-TV shows 73 percent of Utahns favor such a measure.

We agree. For the most extreme cases, prosecutors need more options than a Class A misdemeanor. These would be cases of egregious torture such as Henry's experiences or a recent case in Pittsburgh, in which a man mailed the severed head of kitten to an ex-girlfriend. The Pennsylvania man has been ordered to stand trial on stalking and animal cruelty charges.

Deliberate animal torture is far-flung from some of the tasks that ranchers or hunters undertake, so, seemingly, lawmakers could craft a bill that would protect ranchers' ability to make a living yet hold the worst animal abusers to account. Many supporters of the so-called Henry's law caution that torture of animals is linked to the abuse of human beings. It's best to stem this conduct as soon as possible.

While we support the legislation and understand the sentiments of its backers, placing it on a special session call wouldn't be the best use of state resources. Advocates should use this time to enlist the help of lawmakers and recruit a sponsor who can bridge the urban vs. rural concerns and lobby lawmakers anew in 2008.