IT’S been less than two weeks since the government raised Australia’s national terror alert to high.

Despite Prime Minister Tony Abbott insisting there was no specific threat and people should continue their lives as normal at the time, in the days since, police have revealed an alleged plot to grab an innocent person off the street and behead them.

The Australian Federal Police have taken over security at Parliament House and this morning, an 18 year-old terror suspect was shot dead after stabbing two police officers.

Meanwhile, more police are visible in public places with extra security expected at football finals this weekend.

MORE: Tony Abbott raises Australia’s terror alert to high

Amid these developments, the Attorney General has released the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Bill.

The 164 page draft, being brought to the Senate today, contains a series of measures to crack down on extremism at home and abroad.

But laws like this can hold an uneasy alliance with individual freedoms and transparency. How much are you willing to give up in the name of security? Here’s a quick look at what’s on the table:

TARGETING THOSE WHO ‘ADVOCATE TERRORISM’

The bill creates a new offence for anyone who ‘advocates terrorism’.

It imposes a maximum jail sentence of five years.

This includes any suspect proven to have intentionally counselled, promoted, encouraged, commissioned or praised acts of terrorism, however the Attorney General has denied it will focus on specific groups or limit freedom of speech.

“This is a law of general application, it’s not directed at any section of the community,” Senator Brandis told Sky News. “There’s all the difference in the world between expressing opinions and inciting violence.”

MORE: Read the draft legislation here

The Centre for Islam and the Modern World’s Director Professor Greg Barton said while the new laws might have some “rough edges” they generally strike the right balance between protecting freedoms and security.

“That speaks to the broad nature of the threat and it looks like these have been crafted about right, but we should always look at the detail.

“Although it is presented as being an erosion of our civil liberties … most are things Australians would assume are already there. We’re making it easier to do necessary work police are trying to do.”

Prof Barton said current terror laws rely on a strict interpretation, in which people need to be caught plotting a specific attack. The new laws will mean those who provide support via social media could also become liable.

CRACKDOWN ON FOREIGN TRAVEL

Under the new laws those who travel to “declared areas” where terrorist groups operate could face five years in jail if they can’t provide a valid reason for visiting, such as aid work or journalism.

Australian intelligence estimates there are around 60 people fighting with the Islamic State in strongholds like Mosul in Iraq, and Raqqa in Syria, with more than 20 having returned home from the region.

Prof. Barton said this is not a reversal of the presumption of innocence, but the will need to be applied correctly in order to ensure people aren’t unfairly burdened. “It would be wrong to stop people going to Lebanon or Baghdad but that’s not what’s being proposed,” he said.

GREATER POWER FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

The bill will provide greater power for law enforcement agencies to investigate, arrest and prosecute people who support foreign conflicts. It will also broaden the criteria and streamline the process for listing terrorism groups, and expand it to include those who advocate terrorism.

Police will be given greater powers to arrest suspects and to access preventive detention orders faster — needing verbal approval only in urgent circumstances.

There will also be an expanded role for the attorney-general’s department and customs to collect biometric information — physical identifiers unique to an individual, such as fingerprints and facial scans.

Welfare, family payments and paid parental leave can be cancelled on security grounds under the new laws while passports can be seized for 14 days, and if such a seizure could tip the person off to an investigation, it can be done without notice. Search warrants can also be executed without notice if circumstances allow, while there will be greater flexibility for courts to admit material from overseas terrorism related proceedings provided it was not obtained under torture or duress.

Police will also be able to obtain control orders, which place restrictions on suspects such as curfews, electronic monitoring tags and telecommunications, without attorney-general input in emergency situations.

WHAT’S THE REACTION?

Labor has offered support for the new bill in principle but raised concerns about certain issues such as criminalisation of travel to specific areas.

“It appears to curtail not only freedom of movement but also the right to silence and the presumption of innocence,” said shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus.

Greens leader Christine Milne also said Australians should stay calm about the issue.

“People are feeling anxious (and) scared because of the hyped up atmosphere that’s permeating everybody’s dinner table,” she said

Others groups oppose the new laws, claiming fears or a terror attack are being used to justify legislative overreach from our lawmakers. Liberal Democrat Senator David Leyonhjelm said he won’t support moves to give greater power to ASIO as it could encroach on Australian’s civil liberties.

“Taken as a whole it could well be described as contrary to the rule of law and detrimental to our liberties,” he said.

Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesman Greg Barns also is against greater powers for ASIO, saying: “Both major parties are using terror fears to allow ASIO to harass and rough up individuals, spy on our neighbours, and other associated activities without the media being able to ensure Australians know about such abuses of power.”

The forum on Australia’s Islamic Relations spokesman Kuranda Seyit said freedoms were being sacrificed in the name of security.

“I am very worried that we are allowing the terrorists to gain the upper hand. This is what they want,” he said.

“They want Australia to become a police state with very few human rights and freedoms.”

What do you think about the proposed laws? Continue the conversation on Twitter @newscomauHQ | @Victoria_Craw