Testimonies

bitterkenny said:

They wanted Rosa Parks to comply too.

Click to expand...

smokey0118 said:

This is actually a more important post than you may have intended. "know your audience". Your testimony can be made to be more effective if you speak to not only the specific values of the committee members, but to the values of their constituents. It's especially powerful if you happen to be someone from a demographic group they are trying to use as a political prop.

For instance, I am a teacher. While I could frame my argument from many different angles, my most impactful one to the committee is probably to argue as a teacher, in the interest of my students, against their caricature of the situation. Another would be someone who is black citing the racist roots of gun control, complete with comparisons of the proposed legislation to poll taxes, and literacy tests. It's difficult for a democrat to argue why burdens should be placed against the 2a, but should not be placed against things like voting. It's easy to explain how underprivileged minorities are disproportionately negatively impacted by financial, time, and training burdens....while being the most in need of tools for defense.

Also try not to lose your cool. Adrenaline is real and the fight-flight-freeze response may pop up. If you're like me, it may combine with your dislike for your oppressors and materialize as some verbal jabs at them. If you attack them, they're more likely to disregard your testimony than if you speak in a way they can identify with.

Click to expand...

teratos said:

I am of the opinion that fat white guys arguing racism is not persuasive.

Click to expand...

pbharvey said:

I usually start with "I have a lot of black friends." That way they know I'm not racist.

Click to expand...

smokey0118 said:

This is actually a more important post than you may have intended. "know your audience". Your testimony can be made to be more effective if you speak to not only the specific values of the committee members, but to the values of their constituents. It's especially powerful if you happen to be someone from a demographic group they are trying to use as a political prop.

For instance, I am a teacher. While I could frame my argument from many different angles, my most impactful one to the committee is probably to argue as a teacher, in the interest of my students, against their caricature of the situation. Another would be someone who is black citing the racist roots of gun control, complete with comparisons of the proposed legislation to poll taxes, and literacy tests. It's difficult for a democrat to argue why burdens should be placed against the 2a, but should not be placed against things like voting. It's easy to explain how underprivileged minorities are disproportionately negatively impacted by financial, time, and training burdens....while being the most in need of tools for defense.

Also try not to lose your cool. Adrenaline is real and the fight-flight-freeze response may pop up. If you're like me, it may combine with your dislike for your oppressors and materialize as some verbal jabs at them. If you attack them, they're more likely to disregard your testimony than if you speak in a way they can identify with.

Click to expand...

Uncle Duke said:

Respectfully, I agree whole heartedly with your assertions regarding potentially effective angles. But for these people to “identify” with an argument assumes impartiality at best. Impartiality with these legislators is a reach that I increasingly can’t make.

Could a black man make a 2A argument that would sway a Maryland Democratic Party legislator? Maybe, but I’d suggest that if he did, it’s only because (as you suggest) he put the gun control proponent between too much of a rock and a hard place, evoking thoughts of the potential need for damage control.

What these Democratic legislators truly identify with is money, power and the desire to lay waste to gun rights. Normally, and with everyday people who are at least willing to attempt impartiality , I’d agree with trying ones very best to employ the power of tactful persuasion. But perhaps with these people, we’ve arguably been far too polite, for far too long.

Click to expand...

MigraineMan said:

I used to think that, but now I find myself regularly in Annapolis. As mentioned, no one is obligated to use the entire 2 minute testimony window. A simple "Good morning, my name is MigraineMan from Frederick County. I oppose this legislation and ask the committee to return an unfavorable report." is sufficient. Pass the mic and you're done. Your willingness to show up in person and testify is a message unto itself.

If you want to testify, but are intimidated or nervous, that's okay. Know that you won't be there alone. Write some bullet points on an index card, and practice speaking your testimony out-loud in your basement or garage or bedroom. I don't advocate reading prose from a page, because you lose connection to your audience. Time yourself - Android phones have a countdown timer on a tab in the Clock app ... don't know about iOS, but I suspect they do too. You'll be surprised how quick 2 minutes goes. Have a backup plan for a truncated statement that lasts only 30 seconds.

Above all, speak to the Senators and Delegates. Don't just bury your head in your notes. Make eye contact. Make a subconscious connection. Send your message from you to them, even if it's just "I oppose this bill, and you should too."

Click to expand...

Odarlin1 said:

These legislators are not kings. They are your public servants. And I suggest you can bring that to their attention, too. They work for us. Do not be intimidated. The "I am opposed and I will not comply" is a good statement.

Click to expand...

teratos said:

I don’t know that they are going to be persuaded. They are indoctrinated, and emboldened. We MIGHT get them to throw us a couple of bones. I believe these bills will pass. We can either beg the crown for crumbs, or dig in and not comply. This puts MD in a very awkward position. If other States are any gauge, LE refuse to enforce, and are also non-compliant. Explain what is wrong with the bill. Make them as uncomfortable as you can, then tell them you will not comply.[/QUOTE

Regrettably, my inclination is to agree with you.

If it’s inevitable that these bills will pass, and I think we need our best and brightest Annapolis savvy folks as well as our handful of friendly delegates to help to objectively make this determination? Then maybe it’s time to move on.

Maybe the story this year isn’t so much what legislation comes out of Annapolis. Maybe reality is that the only story within our control is reports of an unprecedented level of citizen defiance in stated testimony, as a catalyst that can perhaps facilitate some future progress, maybe in the form of joining other states with laws seen as being more quickly in dire need of court scrutiny.

I don’t have this answer. But if things are going to get even more unfriendly, well despite the best of wishes for otherwise....

Click to expand...

Uncle Duke said:

Respectfully, I agree whole heartedly with your assertions regarding potentially effective angles. But for these people to “identify” with an argument assumes impartiality at best. Impartiality with these legislators is a reach that I increasingly can’t make.

Could a black man make a 2A argument that would sway a Maryland Democratic Party legislator? Maybe, but I’d suggest that if he did, it’s only because (as you suggest) he put the gun control proponent between too much of a rock and a hard place, evoking thoughts of the potential need for damage control.

What these Democratic legislators truly identify with is money, power and the desire to lay waste to gun rights. Normally, and with everyday people who are at least willing to attempt impartiality , I’d agree with trying ones very best to employ the power of tactful persuasion. But perhaps with these people, we’ve arguably been far too polite, for far too long.

Click to expand...

teratos said:

I don’t know that they are going to be persuaded. They are indoctrinated, and emboldened. We MIGHT get them to throw us a couple of bones. I believe these bills will pass. We can either beg the crown for crumbs, or dig in and not comply. This puts MD in a very awkward position. If other States are any gauge, LE refuse to enforce, and are also non-compliant. Explain what is wrong with the bill. Make them as uncomfortable as you can, then tell them you will not comply.

Click to expand...

smokey0118 said:

You're both absolutely correct, but there's no reason to only adopt one strategy. In testimony, craft it to be compelling. In politics, be ruthless and attack the purse strings. In your personal life, exercise your inalienable rights and refuse to comply with unconstitutional legislation. In the cultural battle, win people to our side by promoting the 2a lifestyle and introducing new people to it. In media, counter false narratives with evidence-based truths(which are on our side). All of these fronts are important and all of them are being fought by the other side. The more impactful the testimonies, the fewer tyrannical infringements you can choose to not comply with.

Click to expand...

Inspector1489 said:

...
But I'm going to do my best to drag my sorry, white, bald, nobody a$$ in front of the committee on the 25th. I want them to not only see me, but also hear my testimony, even if it falls upon deaf ears. At least then, I can go enjoy a beer knowing that I did what I could.

Click to expand...

welder516 said:

Thank You for the folks that are going to speak , I am grateful . I will at least be there one day on the 25th and show my support , I want to be optimistic and believe they will hear the speakers out .

Click to expand...

Adolph Oliver Bush said:

At least come take a seat so that someone in a
red shirt cant sit in it. Thats doing something.

Click to expand...

teratos said:

I am of the opinion that fat white guys arguing racism is not persuasive.

Click to expand...

bitterkenny said:

They wanted Rosa Parks to comply too.

Click to expand...

gtodave said:

Now if every single one of us said that we won't comply, and they heard it 1,000 times....then maybe we'd have something.

Click to expand...

teratos said:

That's what I'm talking about. Typically, our fight is to not get things passed, or mitigate the damage. They NEED to know that they have gone too far and it will be ignored.

Click to expand...

bitterkenny said:

They wanted Rosa Parks to comply too.

Click to expand...

welder516 said:

Thank You for the folks that are going to speak , I am grateful . I will at least be there one day on the 25th and show my support , I want to be optimistic and believe they will hear the speakers out .

Click to expand...