In response to high-profile climate protests disrupting ports, railways, and peak-hour traffic, several Australian states have enacted contentious legislation introducing severe fines and potential jail time for non-violent obstruction. These laws target 'lock-on' devices and unauthorized blocking of major infrastructure, sparking a fierce national debate on the limits of civil disobedience in a democracy. Supporters argue that strict deterrents are vital to stop 'professional pests' from holding the economy hostage and preventing ordinary citizens from traveling freely. Opponents contend that these laws are an authoritarian overreach that criminalizes valid political expression and ignores the urgent message behind the disruptions.
Response rates from 58 Australia voters.
Trend of support over time for each answer from 58 Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 58 Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Australia voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@BCXPZK52mos2MO
Join in on the most popular conversations.
Based on 58 responses to this question.
These results come from iSideWith's ongoing political issues survey. We collect over a million responses per day, filter out duplicate and multiple submissions, and break the results down by political party, ideology, age, state, and census demographics (income, race, education, household).
iSideWith is non-partisan — we don't advocate for any party, candidate, or position. We report what the public tells us.
Writing about this issue? Use the live data and link back to the full results.
