That's the first thing that came to my mind.

Please don't broadcast his name and photo - just that he was a bigoted coward.

But a problematic person WITHOUT a firearm still causes enormous damage. Please don't amplify their capabilities.

Many of us have suffered at the hands of people who would have been absolutely deadly if they had/have easier access to firearms, especially the types that are currently even more restricted. I used to have the attitude of "it's the person, not the firearm, that's problematic".

I am no fan of John Howard. I used to hunt. But our gun laws are essential and should not be watered down. They have saved many, many lives and untold misery. Do not dilute them.

I'm very disappointed about the Woodside decision and continuing with AUKUS. And what's been written in this post is disappointing. Substitute "John Doe" and the corresponding pronouns etc in the post and see how it reads. Would you have used this wording, in this order, for a male senator?

Women actually ARE competent and capable of "doing it all", but why should we have to?

It still doesn't allow us to "have it all".

Meanwhile, men are not even required to prove they can do ONE thing competently, let alone all of it, and they are still given the world.