Are Hate Crime Enhancements Unjust in the United States?

What is a hate crime?
A hate crime is defined as "A hate crime, also known as a bias crime, is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin."
(Definition provided by the FBI)

What a hate crime enhancement does is not only punish a perpetrator for the crime he committed but also adds more time due to the mentality behind the crime. My question to everyone is: Are these enhancements just? Should the assailant be not only sentenced due to the crime that he committed or should he also suffer a greater crime because his crime affected more people?First off I am going to show you the side which says that these enhancements are just, and then I will show you the side that says that these enhancements are illegal and should not be tolerated.

Some people say that hate crime enhancements are just, and the most used argument for this is the fact that it can be used as a deterrent for future offenders. Some people say that we need these enhancements to have a peaceful community, and that punishing someone for a crime is different because a hate crime is a heinous crime. People say that hate crimes cause a ripple effect in that they not only affect the individual, Sean Hannity writes " Hate crimes cause a ripple effect far beyond the injured person." What this means is that a hate crime not only affects the person that was "victimized" but also the entire community that shares in the common factor of the victim. There have been some advocates that say due to the fact that this crime affects more people then the sentence should be greater to match the magnitude of the people.

There have been some people that say that despite all the evidence hate crime enhancements are in fact unjust. There have been some people that say that if a crime is committed twice by two different people and the only difference is that one crime happened due to his personal belief then there should be no enhancements. They say that the people who advocate for the "equality and fairness" in society should realize that they are in fact weighing one crime over the other and that is in fact unjust to the family of the lesser sentenced perpetrator. With our society holding double standards all over the place (i.e. drugs vs alcohol, and "legal ages") why should we have a double standard in our "justice" system? People have said that under the Fifth Amendment no person can be punished twice for the same crime, and tat doing so would violate the double jeopardy clause.

So my question to you is what do you think about the hate crime enhancements? Should a person be punished for a greater crime against a greater number of people or should they not cause injustice for the victims of those whose crimes were not deemed "Hate Crimes."