Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,137
Added - This thread is not intended to convince anyone to testify . If you are not inclined to participate in this manner , I will not be twisting your arm at this time . For people who have decided to participate in the Hearing process , I will present these thoughts and observations .
****************
Not so much * What * your exact message, but * How * to effectively advance our intrests through communicating in a Hearing format .
We have observations, opinions, facts, personal experiences , and logical arguments . Lots of them . For most of us , the struggle is to reduce them to the necessary brevity .
Extreme scenario #1 - Totally cold in a Vacuum , you step into an elevator with a politician or other person to whom we want to communicate our message. They turn to you and ask , So what about XYZ ? "
We should have enough background knowledge about each Bill to give 1 or 2 non-insulting reasons why its good or bad in 30 sec .
A Committee Hearing is a dynamic environment . ( Meaning it is not static , and the situation can change throughout the course of the Hearing .)
Unless you are the first witness on the first panel that is in Favor of the Bill , you are not starting cold in neutral environment . ( Hint- On most of the significant Bills , we will be in Opposed , and the other side has already said their piece .)
Did a pro - gun person speaking before you get traction with a particular point ? Then if you can further reinforce , or expand on that point ( with facts, or relevant personal experiences ) , then you can do that .
Did previous pro gun speakers effectively address points A, B, and C ? Then you could address points D, or E .
Did people with the other position earlier give testimony on a particular subject, and your mental alarm bells sound ?
Don't insult or demean other people testifing . Instead somthing to the effect of " The subject of Blah, Blah came up earlier, and I'd like to address that " . You could speak to your personal experiences in that regard , and provide different viewpoints and conclusions . If they used misapplied or non-sense statistics , rebut with correct statistics .
Listen to the previous testimony , and do real time fact checking on lap tops and smartphones .
One occasion the Antis were making sensational statements about Domestic Violence Homicides . I was able to later address the subject with UCR numbers broken down by relationship to victims , and even including every vaguely applicable Victim category, the statistics were massively different . Use recognized sources, and the UCR are the gold standard .
And finally , one memorable occasion my testimony was " Mr D C-W just excellently presented the information I would have given ."
****************
Not so much * What * your exact message, but * How * to effectively advance our intrests through communicating in a Hearing format .
We have observations, opinions, facts, personal experiences , and logical arguments . Lots of them . For most of us , the struggle is to reduce them to the necessary brevity .
Extreme scenario #1 - Totally cold in a Vacuum , you step into an elevator with a politician or other person to whom we want to communicate our message. They turn to you and ask , So what about XYZ ? "
We should have enough background knowledge about each Bill to give 1 or 2 non-insulting reasons why its good or bad in 30 sec .
A Committee Hearing is a dynamic environment . ( Meaning it is not static , and the situation can change throughout the course of the Hearing .)
Unless you are the first witness on the first panel that is in Favor of the Bill , you are not starting cold in neutral environment . ( Hint- On most of the significant Bills , we will be in Opposed , and the other side has already said their piece .)
Did a pro - gun person speaking before you get traction with a particular point ? Then if you can further reinforce , or expand on that point ( with facts, or relevant personal experiences ) , then you can do that .
Did previous pro gun speakers effectively address points A, B, and C ? Then you could address points D, or E .
Did people with the other position earlier give testimony on a particular subject, and your mental alarm bells sound ?
Don't insult or demean other people testifing . Instead somthing to the effect of " The subject of Blah, Blah came up earlier, and I'd like to address that " . You could speak to your personal experiences in that regard , and provide different viewpoints and conclusions . If they used misapplied or non-sense statistics , rebut with correct statistics .
Listen to the previous testimony , and do real time fact checking on lap tops and smartphones .
One occasion the Antis were making sensational statements about Domestic Violence Homicides . I was able to later address the subject with UCR numbers broken down by relationship to victims , and even including every vaguely applicable Victim category, the statistics were massively different . Use recognized sources, and the UCR are the gold standard .
And finally , one memorable occasion my testimony was " Mr D C-W just excellently presented the information I would have given ."
Last edited: