SB0281 - Testimony Primer and Tracking

This is my attempt at creating a base document for us to build our individual testimonies upon. I believe that we should try our best to stick to several key points and make sure that everyone has a solid understanding of what they are going to say and how they are going to say it, BEFORE they go up.

I've spent the last 2 hours typing this up and I am open to comments and more importantly, suggestions. There are surely typos because I haven't proofed it very well, but I'll do that continually as we add upon the document.

The first document, located HERE, should give you some basic pointers and hopefully provide a starting point for your testimony. Again, I have no pride. Feel free to criticize and offer ideas. My only intention is to make our effort as organized and effective as possible. I'm open to anything that furthers that goal.

TESTIMONY PRIMER DOC (several pages)

PLEASE CROSSLINK TO THIS POST AND SPREAD THE WORD!
Check THIS out as well.


Also, important advice from Norton:

I've testified on nearly every gun bill for the last decade. The senate and the house committees are run very differently. The House is not too hostile, but the Senate is quite different.

Since we're focusing on the Senate right now:
1. You stand at at a lectern with a mic. Very different than the House where you sit at the table. You feel very exposed.
2. Make one point. Make it clear and concise. Don't waver from that one point.
3. You aren't Patrick Henry, no matter how erudite and prosaic you think you are. Stick to that one factual point discussed in #2. Don't talk about the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, or George Washington crossing the Delaware. (). They don't care. They aren't listening. Their eyes are glazing over. The only people you are talking to at this point are the ones that already agree with you.
4. See #2 again. Write down some crib notes and stick to the script.
5. You're >supposed< to get 3 minutes. Frosh will likely cut that back to 2 minutes. It's not right, it's not the rules, but that's the way it is. He doesn't play fair and he doesn't care that you know it.
6. Remember that the most important words to come from your mouth when asked a question are as follows: "I don't know". Practice saying it now. I can't tell you how many times some well-meaning person has tripped things up because they got up there and tried to go toe-to-toe in a question and answer session. These people are attorneys for the most part. When they start asking you lots of questions, it's because they know they can manipulate you and push you around. When you start getting asked questions, it's because they consider you prey. Eject. Fast forward to #7 below.
7. Frosh does not run a fair hearing. Most importantly, do not engage him in a question and answer session. He will use you. We might not like him and in fact we might despise him, however he is very good at what he does. He has no respect for you as a person or a citizen if you are a gun owner. This is a personal vendetta for him. Refer to #6 - "I don't know" might be the most important words to come from your mouth. He will put you on the ropes and smack you around and will feel good about it at the end of the day. I've seen some hapless people get held up there like a bug on a pin by this guy and it's horrible to watch it happen and know there's nothing that you can do to help them. You might think you can go toe-to-toe with him, but you are wrong.
8. It is perfectly fine to simply go to the mic and say "I oppose this bill". Make a line out the door if necessary. By some point in the day, every important point will have been made.
9. Remember that while you are testifying, they have their laptops up and running and are looking for anything they can to punch holes in what you are saying. If you are going to use numbers and figures, they better be verifiable and well-documented. Make sure you understand the next level down in the discussion, like a chess player. See #6 and #7.

I'm sure there's something I'm missing, but for the new folks, this should be something to think about.

I might suggest we all introduce ourselves in a manor that shows our education and diversity. Here's what I was planning:

Name: Hello, my name is [Z/28]
Residency: I am a [lifelong] Maryland resident, living in [Baltimore] County
Education: I have a [Bachelor of Science Degree] from [our very own Towson University]
I am a gun owner. I oppose this bill, yada yada yada...

-Z/28- said:

I might suggest we all introduce ourselves in a manor that shows our education and diversity. Here's what I was planning:

Name: Hello, my name is [Z/28]
Residency: I am a [lifelong] Maryland resident, living in [Baltimore] County
Education: I have a [Bachelor of Science Degree] from [our very own Towson University]
I am a gun owner. I oppose this bill, yada yada yada...

Click to expand...

Hey... A RESPONSE!! You made my day. Thought i just wasted 2 hours of my time for no reason.

Anyway. yes, I think that's a great idea... Although I might not state my area of residence since it is safely "red" and I'd like to at least give the impression that I may live in a fence-sitter district.

occbrian said:

Hey... A RESPONSE!! You made my day. Thought i just wasted 2 hours of my time for no reason.

Anyway. yes, I think that's a great idea... Although I might not state my area of residence since it is safely "red" and I'd like to at least give the impression that I may live in a fence-sitter district.

Click to expand...

Good point. Only those in liberal counties really need to bring that up.

A Couple of Suggestions

Brian,

Great job pulling this together and getting it out there for people! A couple of suggestions:

"Modern sporting rifles are not the same thing as Assault Weapons" - recommend changing this to "Assault Rifles" since "Assault Weapon" is a term coined by the liberal gun haters

In the section "Legally Owned and Obtained Weapons are not the problem" - suggest deleting the bullet that says "Newtown - murdered and stole weapon" as this could potentially support their argument that they need to get these off the street so this (theft of weapon) doesn't happen again


Again, great job!

Michael

MDHunter said:

Brian,

Great job pulling this together and getting it out there for people! A couple of suggestions:

"Modern sporting rifles are not the same thing as Assault Weapons" - recommend changing this to "Assault Rifles" since "Assault Weapon" is a term coined by the liberal gun haters

In the section "Legally Owned and Obtained Weapons are not the problem" - suggest deleting the bullet that says "Newtown - murdered and stole weapon" as this could potentially support their argument that they need to get these off the street so this (theft of weapon) doesn't happen again


Again, great job!

Michael

Click to expand...

Done and done. Thanks for the input!

I testified about 3 years ago when Frosh/Miller introduced their last attempt at disenfranchisement of 2A adherents (a word we HAVE to start using -Liberals love it!)
I talked about the case of Puerto Rico, a US territory where the "state" constitution as a 2A, but it has been gutted so badly, that you are limited to purchase 200 rds a year, and if you do not use them, you have to turn them in. They require licensing, fingerprinting, full field investigation, interview of neighbors and relatives, etc, and that is only for "possession" of a handgun, i.e., keeping it in your home. For carry permits, forget it!

It took me two years to get a permit to keep a shotgun and a 9MM handgun in my house.

Puerto Rico, (an island-so it's not like the criminals can go to the next state and purchase a gun at a gun show-which are not allowed) has a de facto ban on private gun ownership, draconian limits on ammunition purchase, and almost impossible licensing scheme to carry a handgun. Yet somehow, it has the seventh highest murder rate in the world per capita according to the UN, and 94.8% of murders are committed with a firearm. Bans breed disobedience, and criminals always get what they want.

I'm screwed I put in for Feb 8th.

Hello, my name is [pilgrim]
I am a Maryland Democrat living in the city of Rockville, Gulag 17
Husband and father of ___ children.
And I oppose this bill, yada yada yada...

My wife may be able to go on the 6th. Won't know until the February schedule is posted.

I might also add that you should add historical context to this, the fact that the weapons that they wish to ban includes nearly every modern firearm cosmetically similar to the firearms that have kept this country safe for the last half century is an affront to every patriotic citizen especially those who are preparing their sons and daughters to enter ROTC, the service academies, and enlist in the armed services.

These persons will now be at a competitive disadvantage because of this. Service rifle competitors, including members of the Naval Academy Shooting Team will not even be allowed to own their own rifles or practice without someone over the age of 21 to supervise them at all times until they turn 21. Is that the message we want to send to our future military leaders who will bear the tremendous responsibility of leading other young men and women into harms way?

What about the enlisted service member, who wants a rifle of his own to train with when not on duty. Do you intend to restrict his ability to become a more proficient rifleman? What about young wounded warriors who have turned to shooting sports because of the physical demands of shooting competitions are compatible with their service connected injuries?

And of course, you can always compare and contrast assault weapon deaths with all other forms of it. Yet, cigarette packs still have twenty cigarettes and are responsible for 443,000 deaths annually (over 6,900 in Maryland alone in 2010)... yet these are available in 100 round high capacity cartons! 640,000 Marylander's despite the risk are allowed to smoke. Children who are not illegally allow to have cigarettes, smoke at the rate of nearly 10%. Yet, lawmakers in Maryland are NOT interested in saving these children, they would rather focus on weapons that look "scary". All Stats from the CDC on smoking. If you're gonna ban something, you might start with a real public health issue that isn't constitutionally protected.

EVERYONE should remind them that despite the incorrect interpretation by many, Shall Not Be Infringed appears no where else in the consistution for a reason. Jefferson is a good citation for this.

The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, ... or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.
-- Thomas Jefferson Letter to Major John Cartwright (5 June 1824).

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
-- Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776


The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people.
-- Fisher Ames, Letter to F.R. Minoe, June 12, 1789 (reporting to Minoe on the amendments proposed by Madison).

They clearly KNEW and INTENDED what they wrote and even debated it!

I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor.

-- George Mason

There are definitely some good points in your docs. Thank you for putting them together. I will be attending on the 6th and I wasn't thinking of testifying, but I'm starting to change my mind.
Thank you again.

Dirichlet said:

There are definitely some good points in your docs. Thank you for putting them together. I will be attending on the 6th and I wasn't thinking of testifying, but I'm starting to change my mind.
Thank you again.

Click to expand...

No problem! I'm glad it was of use. Be sure to check this out as well, http://marylandshallissue.org/share/SB0281_pamphlet.pdf

Here is some more useful research, I can't be there, but doesn't mean I can't help from here by digging a bit.


So back to the fight at hand though, we need to compare the problem of assault weapons to REAL public health issues, the carnage from "assault weapons" is nothing compared to other issues, such as drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, obesity, etc. They are trying to frame gun control as a public health issue, and it fails miserably as such.

For example, take England, which is always touted as a mecca for Freedom Hating Gun Control Advocates.

Suicide in England is at an all time 30 year high (~12/100,000). Firearms are involved in 2.3% (Office for National Statistics)
Suicide in United States is at an all time 15 year high (~12/100,000). Firearms are involved in 50% of all suicides. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

So tell me, will your law stop one of the leading causes of death by firearm, or will it simply shift the problem elsewhere?
If we extrapolate what happened in England, suicidal people simply pick a different expedient method.

In 2011, there were 32,163 deaths attributed to firearms for ANY cause, suicide accounted for approximately 2/3's (19,766) of all deaths by firearm. There were only 851 unintentional deaths by firearms in 2011, despite over 270,000,000 firearms in the US in private hands. The number of firearms used each year in non-suicide fatal shootings is less than 5/1000th of one percent of firearms estimated to be in private hands, this includes self-defense and law enforcement. (270 million firearms / 12,397 non-suicide deaths). <- why are we here again, to discuss what is clearly not an issue.

Hoyert, Donna L. and Jiaquan Xu. 2012. ‘Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2011 - Selected Causes.’ National Vital Statistics Reports (NVSS); Vol 61, No. 6, pp.40-42. Hyattsville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control Prevention, Division of Vital Statistics. 10 October.

occbrian said:

I've spent the last 2 hours typing this up and I am open to comments and more importantly, suggestions. There are surely typos because I haven't proofed it very well, but I'll do that continually as we add upon the document.

Click to expand...

Bravo Zulu, as my former Navy compatriots would say: Well Done! Overall, your document is an extremely useful primer for folks to prepare for 6 Feb 13.

I have a few small corrections for your consideration:

Modern Sporting Rifles ARE used to hunt.
Everything from varmit to deer [varmints]

Aurora- Failed procedures for mentally ill (shooter said he was going to [what? Sentence is cut off...]

Basic rights shouldn’t be infringed based on “maybe’s” [plural is "maybes", not possessive]

Thanks again for your hard work in putting this together. It will be really hard for us former military to avoid using the term "weapon(s)", as it was drilled into our skulls as the preferred terminology over "gun(s)" from the beginning of our firearms training.

--Dreamquencher

I would suggest that you don't fall into the trap of calling semi automatic rifles assault weapons, I would use the term so called assault weapons, and if asked explain that we are not talking machine guns. Calling a AR a assault weapon is like calling a Prius with a spoiler and racing strip a race car.

Brychan said:

I would suggest that you don't fall into the trap of calling semi automatic rifles assault weapons, I would use the term so called assault weapons, and if asked explain that we are not talking machine guns. Calling a AR a assault weapon is like calling a Prius with a spoiler and racing strip a race car.

Click to expand...

I like to call them sport utility weapons.

Name and adress are standard when introducing yourself. I like to compare Modern Sporting Rifles to Modern Cars. They have adjustable seats and adjustable stocks so that they can be properly fit for safe operation. Various grips enhance control like radial tires do on cars. Rails that allow lights and lasers are like anti lock brakes allowing target identification when something goes bump in the night preventing accidents like the police officer who shot his son last year coming in late at night. I also fully intend to point to the ADA issue for people like myself who cannot properly grip conventional stocks. Then of course is the ammo possesion ban which would make a criminal of my son if he picks up a stray round instead of running it over with the lawnmower.
They lumped so much crap into this bill that there is no way to get it all into 3min so I think we will need to coordinate who is taking what and send letters and emails on each part of the issue.

I suppose that those in the legal know have already considered past decisions as substantiation for their testimonies. My humble understanding is that the class of firearms being targeted by the ban are actually the ones that are most protected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

In US v Miller, the government argued that the 2nd Amendment only protected those firearms which had a military association. All following opinions that reference Miller seem to come to one or both of the following conclusions:

1. A protected weapon must have some use in respect to militias or the military and/or
2. Protected weapons include those in common use at the time

IMHO I would think that the AR platform survives both criteria. Being that clear, this bill would not survive a court challenge. The potential cost to the state in a class action suit for damages to gun owners could be unfathomable. Off base?

It seems to me that Frosh is single-handedly trying to provide Alan Gura a reasonable expectation of job security.

Should we prepare multiple statements? We don't all want to go up and say the same things over and over. I'm thinking some people could hit on why gun bans don't reduce crime, others could talk about legitimate recreational use, maybe concealed carry's effect on reducing crime, etc.

Also, don't let them disrespect you. I've seen video from past events where people are talking, and the reps are checking their email, talking to each other, filing fingernails, etc. The poor citizen talking keeps reading his paper, with nobody paying attention. Use eye contact, and directly address people when you're speaking. We want the senators to be paying attention the entire time, not reading TMZ while people are talking.

Good write-up! Pick a particular area and hit it har; but respectfully and factually.

I'm on the handgun licensing part. I hate it all, but that's what I feel called to testify on.

I'll be wearing khakis and a NASA GSFC polo (I could wear a generic black GSFC polo with embrodered logo or a light blue Curiosity mission polo, what do y'all think?). What follows is the shorthand version of what I want to say.

Hello, I am Bolts Rock. I was born about two miles due east of here at the USNA when Eisenhower was President and have for most of my life been a citizen of MD. I have been shooting in one form or another for close to 48 years. I am a technician and work at the world's largest concentration of researchers, scientists, engineers and technicians right here in MD; facts and raw numbers matter to me and you have most of them wrong or so manipulated they mean nothing. I oppose this bill and all similar to this bill.

Read 2A, define well regulated as it was used at the time, define militia as used then and now under Dick Act and US Code. Refer them to Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.

Cite Miller, Heller, McDonald and mention that the AR platform has for the past decade been the dominant platform on competition firing lines. Thus confirming common use, militia relevance and accuracy.

Cite CDC and FBI UCR top level and selected raw data for causes of death in the US. Mention the Clinton AWB did not affect crime as they predicted it would. [Maybe mention this bill will do nothing to prevent crime but rather encourage crime through non-compliance?]

Refer again to Heller, McDonald and Wollard and the costs to the state(s) of those cases. As Dylan Thomas once said, "I will not go quiet into that good night." Meaning gentlemen, I will fight you in every legal way possible. I will donate money to every lawsuit brought against the state and yourselves should you pass this bill. I will donate time and money to working against each of you personally when you attempt to run to re-election. I will not lie down and allow you to rape my unalienable Rights.


Feel free to comment. Does anyone have yhe costs of Heller, McDonald and Wollard or should I pester NRA-ILA or SAF for those?