Ok, I am completely at odds with myself over hate crime laws. I agree with the idea that intention should have an effect on the sentence - this is basically the defining difference between murder and manslaughter and it really does make sense to me. However I don't really see how the motive of hating somebody for their skin colour, or their sexuality is greater than any other motive that does not relate to provocation. Unprovoked attacks should all probably be treated in a similar manner in my opinion.
Also with respect to this case intention is also important. The man who did this was clearly an arsehole, however he did not go out with the intention to cause this man brain damage. The assault he did (purposefully) ended up causing brain damage and he should be held accountable for that, but it is a lesser crime than causing the brain damage on purpose. If the six years is a non-parole period then I can see it as being on the low end of the reasonable scale.
Also the twelve years for those racists is completely unreasonable for the scale of their crime, in the relative scale of crimes I believe this ranks much lower than rape for example, which often has lesser sentences than this.
///This post was made while I was drunk. So sorry if it's somewhat unreasonable.
