Ok, so we didn't get a bunch of people outside to protest. None the less, I think inside at the hearing went well.
To begin with there were a LOT of CHP security people. Every one had to go through a metal detector. No cameras
or video cams or signs/banners were allowed. The inside of the auditorium was also ringed with armed, plain clothes
officers. We were told this was because the panel had received death threats. ( yeah right ) Even though it was
explained at the beginning that the hearings were only to be for people wishing to address the regulations being
proposed that would define the specific AW characteristics, we were fortunate in that the panel moderator present
for the first 3-1/2 hours of the hearings did not stop people who just wanted to vent their displeasure with SB23 in
general. Which approximately 75% of the people were doing. Something his replacement did not do. But we did get
a chance to be heard. The media was present, both print and TV.
For those going to the LA hearings, the way the hearing is run is: On entering you are given some papers, one of
which is to be filled out and handed in if you wish to speak for the record. Everything was taped BTW, and counts
as much as written submission. The moderator would call a persons name to speak and one for "on deck". Each
person is given 3 minutes and there is someone to give you a 30 second and time up signal. When you get to the
podium you are asked to state your name for the record. As a rule the panel DID NOT respond to any comments
except to ask for clarification. After all had spoken that wanted to they allowed people to have a second turn. This
was a good thing as many were nervous their first time up and had additional things to say. The DOJ also had a
seperate room set up with agents who could address other questions related to SB23. (funny but, of all the people
I saw go through that door, none came back out of it )
Before the first moderator left he thanked the crowd for their courteous manor. He said they had 75 speakers,
although that included some who spoke twice. The auditorium we were in holds 300 and was approximately 75% full
at most. But there were people coming and going from 8 am until the noon lunch break. Many of the things people
had to say drew applause from the crowd. I strongly suggest that no matter what you want to say, try to have it
all written out, or at least in easy to read notes. It helps to make you less nervous I think, and also sound more
coherent with out the uhs and umms. Please all you down south go to the LA hearings. If nothing else it gets your
opinions and thoughts on the record.
The Sacramento Bee had a small article about it online this afternoon:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/beelive/show_story.cgi?guns
To begin with there were a LOT of CHP security people. Every one had to go through a metal detector. No cameras
or video cams or signs/banners were allowed. The inside of the auditorium was also ringed with armed, plain clothes
officers. We were told this was because the panel had received death threats. ( yeah right ) Even though it was
explained at the beginning that the hearings were only to be for people wishing to address the regulations being
proposed that would define the specific AW characteristics, we were fortunate in that the panel moderator present
for the first 3-1/2 hours of the hearings did not stop people who just wanted to vent their displeasure with SB23 in
general. Which approximately 75% of the people were doing. Something his replacement did not do. But we did get
a chance to be heard. The media was present, both print and TV.
For those going to the LA hearings, the way the hearing is run is: On entering you are given some papers, one of
which is to be filled out and handed in if you wish to speak for the record. Everything was taped BTW, and counts
as much as written submission. The moderator would call a persons name to speak and one for "on deck". Each
person is given 3 minutes and there is someone to give you a 30 second and time up signal. When you get to the
podium you are asked to state your name for the record. As a rule the panel DID NOT respond to any comments
except to ask for clarification. After all had spoken that wanted to they allowed people to have a second turn. This
was a good thing as many were nervous their first time up and had additional things to say. The DOJ also had a
seperate room set up with agents who could address other questions related to SB23. (funny but, of all the people
I saw go through that door, none came back out of it )
Before the first moderator left he thanked the crowd for their courteous manor. He said they had 75 speakers,
although that included some who spoke twice. The auditorium we were in holds 300 and was approximately 75% full
at most. But there were people coming and going from 8 am until the noon lunch break. Many of the things people
had to say drew applause from the crowd. I strongly suggest that no matter what you want to say, try to have it
all written out, or at least in easy to read notes. It helps to make you less nervous I think, and also sound more
coherent with out the uhs and umms. Please all you down south go to the LA hearings. If nothing else it gets your
opinions and thoughts on the record.
The Sacramento Bee had a small article about it online this afternoon:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/beelive/show_story.cgi?guns
