And as soon as there is another incident the call for ever more draconian laws will be made and Labor will find themselves wedged again and the cycle will repeat itself ad nauseam. 10/10

Now of course the Government just looks weak and unprincipled and has handed the opposition a victory for no proper reason rather than holding the line and explaining to the public why mandatory sentencing fails. 9/10

And why support this amendment when the Bill would have been enacted? The only reason can be that the Government didn't want to be attacked coming into the election on the basis they didn't support the amendments. 8/10

And where is the evidence that sentences for these offences are too low? There simply isn't any. The hate symbols offences are new and people usually receive far lengthier sentences for terrorism offences. So why are the laws necessary? 7/10

I tried to explain the botched approach to these hate symbol laws here: johnmenadue.com/symbolic-pol... 6/10

The laws may extend, for example, to the red star used by the Kurdistan Workers' Party and, even more concerningly, something that so nearly resembles the symbol that it is likely to be confused with, or mistaken for, it. 5/10

People should be aware that these mandatory sentences apply to all hate symbols, so not just the Hakenkreuz (Nazi Swastika). It would extend to all symbols used by all thirty (!) proscribed terrorist organisations. Do you know the organisations and their symbols? 4/10

So a race to the bottom with politics over principle again, just like past examples: rightnow.org.au/opinion/labo... 3/10

From Labor's national platform: "Labor opposes mandatory sentencing. This practice does not reduce crime but does undermine the independence of the judiciary, lead to unjust outcomes and is often discriminatory in practice." 2/10

‪If people are interested in a longer form article as to why mandatory sentencing fails, I tried to address the issue in the Victorian contact here: bridges.monash.edu/articles/jou...

Thanks Angus!