Jump to content

Members getting harassed as they come to church


Recommended Posts

Is it because it is summer so many are up tonight?  Usually pretty lonely here at this time. 
 

I can’t believe I just might be not the last one on the board tonight as I

am actually feeling like I could sleep right now…my mind at least, let’s see if I can talk my body into it…I am yawning which I rarely do, so good start. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Calm said:

Is it because it is summer so many are up tonight?  Usually pretty lonely here at this time. 
 

I can’t believe I just might be not the last one on the board tonight as I

am actually feeling like I could sleep right now…my mind at least, let’s see if I can talk my body into it…I am yawning which I rarely do, so good start. 

You should sleep if you can. 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Calm said:

And that is why I will never live in my home state again most likely. :cray:

I have spent a decade or more living in both Utah and Ca. I love both states. Recently my visits through the former made me think I was actually in Ca. Traffic congestion, overbuilding, housing prices (my original 30K low income house in Provo, that I sadly no longer own, is now worth almost 500K) and overpopulation in parts of Utah looked just like Ca. About the only significant difference in them now seems to be weather and earthquakes.

 

I know a lot of members in the Santa Clarita area. I will touch bases with some of them to see if this was even an event to them.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I really doubt the people involved in this incident are making that much unless they are getting an unusually large number of outrage clicks due to the publicity.

Oh no, this board is part of the problem.

The article does say that they aren’t making much, a few thousand at present, and the writer compares them to the hundreds of thousands others like Dehlin make.  So my guess would be they’ve branched out into religious harassment to make a few more bucks. Of course, I could be wildly wrong and it may be a principled stand for the first amendment, but I don’t see how or why you need defend that principle by harassing private individuals including children who are on their private land, and taking private details ( eg vin numbers) even if they are in a public space.  If it were me they confronted, I’d take photos of them, as personal as possible, get others to join me in a circle surrounding them and then very loudly sing some hymns! And loudly pray for their souls.

Link to comment
On 7/20/2021 at 7:28 AM, CA Steve said:

I have spent a decade or more living in both Utah and Ca. I love both states. Recently my visits through the former made me think I was actually in Ca. Traffic congestion, overbuilding, housing prices (my original 30K low income house in Provo, that I sadly no longer own, is now worth almost 500K) and overpopulation in parts of Utah looked just like Ca. About the only significant difference in them now seems to be weather and earthquakes.

 

I know a lot of members in the Santa Clarita area. I will touch bases with some of them to see if this was even an event to them.

When we moved to Utah, I picked the place. My husband wasn’t too thrilled as he thought it should be closer to his work, but after my dad driving an hour one way, I told him 20 minutes he could live with and I needed trees, space, and quiet and chose the greenest place in the Valley. It is probably up to 30 minutes now and he still complains at times, but I tell him I am in the home 24 hours a day most days and he is in his car commuting at most an hour and 15 minutes, so I win on who gets to choose where they need to be.  And we aren’t going to find a better neighbourhood which he loves, so I don’t really pay attention to his short lived pity parties about traffic. 
 

We are losing most of our open spaces though…trees are bigger and still quiet, so still best place to be if in Utah. 
 

I avoid Salt Lake when I can.  That does not appeal to me at all. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, sheilauk said:

a few thousand at presen

Per video though wasn’t it?…if they make a video a week that is over $100,000 a year. Depends on how many they split it between and how much editing they do, if any, on whether it is a nice income or not. 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Calm said:

Per video though wasn’t it?…if they make a video a week that is over $100,000 a year. Depends on how many they split it between and how much editing they do, if any, on whether it is a nice income or not. 

Oh, I originally read it as per annum.  Apparently, according to the article, Gonzalez makes about $8600 per month from the YouTube channel, plus advertising, merchandising, donations etc. Franklin Ornelas makes about $500 a month.  It may still be the case that they figure to make even more by religious harassment than by harassing police officers and in post offices.  And obviously they are encouraged by those who donate or even just regularly watch, making them complicit in the harassment. In UK legal circles there was a saying that without handlers of stolen goods, there’d be no thieves (or at least far fewer). So, I guess as the Nehor said, we’ve become part of the problem!  (How do you find out about it, condemn it and try to stop it without creating hits on YouTube which feed the profit and desire for fame element?)

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Calm said:

Is it because it is summer so many are up tonight?  Usually pretty lonely here at this time. 
 

I can’t believe I just might be not the last one on the board tonight as I

am actually feeling like I could sleep right now…my mind at least, let’s see if I can talk my body into it…I am yawning which I rarely do, so good start. 

Yes! Hope this finds you sleeping soundly! I woke up at 3:30ish this morning and had recently heard on a local morning show the things it means if you wake up at different times in the night, and the 3:30 ish time slot means someone from the other side is visiting, hum... 

Yawning is good, I hope this is the start of a good night's or day's sleep. :)

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, sheilauk said:

The article does say that they aren’t making much, a few thousand at present, and the writer compares them to the hundreds of thousands others like Dehlin make.  So my guess would be they’ve branched out into religious harassment to make a few more bucks. Of course, I could be wildly wrong and it may be a principled stand for the first amendment, but I don’t see how or why you need defend that principle by harassing private individuals including children who are on their private land, and taking private details ( eg vin numbers) even if they are in a public space.  If it were me they confronted, I’d take photos of them, as personal as possible, get others to join me in a circle surrounding them and then very loudly sing some hymns! And loudly pray for their souls.

These stupid men have no scruples and could care less what anyone says or does. They are inhumane nearly. 

Link to comment

So, my first thoughts immediately went to how could I stop them from filming.

Idea number one: pull out my flashlight (yes, I always carry a high-powered flashlight with me - doesn't everyone?) and shine it into the camera lens. Filming people in public is perfectly legal (they are right about that), but projecting light onto someone else's property is perfectly legal too. And nobody has a First Amendment right to get usable film footage.

My second thought was easier: just turn on my favorite Pandora channel and follow them around. This one wouldn't actually stop them from filming per se, but it would facilitate either pulling their content down or at least making it less profitable for them later on. YouTube automatically detects songs, and these videos tend to be fairly lengthy. The more copyrighted content that exists on a video, the harder it will be for them to argue fair use, and the more expensive it will be for them should they try to obtain licensing.

My third idea, admittedly, was a bit scandalous: strip one of my kids down their birthday suit and send them out for a quick streak. Then call the cops and have their equipment confiscated as evidence of them being in possession of child porn.

In actuality though, I wouldn't do any of those things.

No, instead, I would walk out, offer them a bottle of water, and then just chat with them for a bit. I'm remarkably unflappable.

I would invite them to put their cameras down and join us inside, and I would hang around as long as they were present to help usher people in and out of the parking lot and avoid any other interaction between them and ward members. Which would make for a pretty boring YouTube video.

 

Edited by Amulek
Link to comment
9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You forgot the traffic.

It's unforgetable.  But you adapt to it.  It's better when you live here and worse when you are visiting.   You learn all the short cuts, and what times of day NOT to travel. It's kind of like driving in snow- once you habituate to it, problems just become "life as we know it".  ;)

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, sheilauk said:

Oh, I originally read it as per annum.  Apparently, according to the article, Gonzalez makes about $8600 per month from the YouTube channel, plus advertising, merchandising, donations etc. Franklin Ornelas makes about $500 a month.  It may still be the case that they figure to make even more by religious harassment than by harassing police officers and in post offices.  And obviously they are encouraged by those who donate or even just regularly watch, making them complicit in the harassment. In UK legal circles there was a saying that without handlers of stolen goods, there’d be no thieves (or at least far fewer). So, I guess as the Nehor said, we’ve become part of the problem!  (How do you find out about it, condemn it and try to stop it without creating hits on YouTube which feed the profit and desire for fame element?)

 

Thought I'd google how people make money on these videos on youtube because I think I'm making a lot of people money! I watch a lot of mini van's turned into a camper or tiny homes or van life etc. plus some political news. Now I'll be more careful about who I support now. But I found this pertinent information and am hopeful that youtube will stand by their rules!

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/youtube-start-paying-you-59420.html

Careful of the Content

In the past, some “bad actors” took advantage of YouTube’s former content policies and posted videos of hate speech, violence and other offensive and fraudulent material. YouTube has tightened its standards and no longer allows this kind of content. To keep the money coming in from your videos, be careful that they follow YouTube’s community guidelines.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, sheilauk said:

The article does say that they aren’t making much, a few thousand at present, and the writer compares them to the hundreds of thousands others like Dehlin make.  So my guess would be they’ve branched out into religious harassment to make a few more bucks. Of course, I could be wildly wrong and it may be a principled stand for the first amendment, but I don’t see how or why you need defend that principle by harassing private individuals including children who are on their private land, and taking private details ( eg vin numbers) even if they are in a public space.  If it were me they confronted, I’d take photos of them, as personal as possible, get others to join me in a circle surrounding them and then very loudly sing some hymns! And loudly pray for their souls.

Honestly the whole thing is juvenile.  If the members just completely ignored them it would just be a boring video of families going to church.  Not all that interesting.  No clicks no money, no harassment 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Amulek said:

So, my first thoughts immediately went to how could I stop them from filming.

Idea number one: pull out my flashlight (yes, I always carry a high-powered flashlight with me - doesn't everyone?) and shine it into the camera lens. Filming people in public is perfectly legal (they are right about that), but projecting light onto someone else's property is perfectly legal too. And nobody has a First Amendment right to get usable film footage.

My second thought was easier: just turn on my favorite Pandora channel and follow them around. This one wouldn't actually stop them from filming per se, but it would facilitate either pulling their content down or at least making it less profitable for them later on. YouTube automatically detects songs, and these videos tend to be fairly lengthy. The more copyrighted content that exists on a video, the harder it will be for them to argue fair use, and the more expensive it will be for them should they try to obtain licensing.

My third idea, admittedly, was a bit scandalous: strip one of my kids down their birthday suit and send them out for a quick streak. Then call the cops and have their equipment confiscated as evidence of them being in possession of child porn.

In actuality though, I wouldn't do any of those things.

No, instead, I would walk out, offer them a bottle of water, and then just chat with them for a bit. I'm remarkably unflappable.

I would invite them to put their cameras down and join us inside, and I would hang around as long as they were present to help usher people in and out of the parking lot and avoid any other interaction between them and ward members. Which would make for a pretty boring YouTube video.

 

You are giving them exactly what they want, drama.  Move a Sunday school class out there and have them film a discussion about the church.  Don’t talk to them. Don’t even look at them.  Be thrilled they are posting church content to their followers.  

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Here's an example of another audit video that is much less harassing than others.

https://youtu.be/pceseL4dTkE

Yep, the "1st amendment audit" community has polite folks and immature idiot rabble rousers.  Nasty Nathaniel is one of the more polite ones. 

In a way, I get them.  People should be able to stand in a public space, and engage in constitutionally protected activity, without being harassed or arrested.  And the fact that cameras freak people out so much, that assaults and arrests are easy to come by, means I can actually applaud a calm and respectful auditor for their efforts to educate and inform people.

But no, inciteful rude [expletive deleted]'s are just immature children.  Probably beat up by their older siblings, and haven't matured into adulthood even though they may be in their 20's or 30's.

Edited by LoudmouthMormon
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Calm said:

When we moved to Utah, I picked the place. My husband wasn’t too thrilled as he thought it should be closer to his work, but after my dad driving an hour one way, I told him 20 minutes he could live with and I needed trees, space, and quiet. It is probably up to 30 minutes now and he still complains at times, but I tell him I am in the home 24 hours a day most days and he is in his car commuting at most an hour and 15 minutes, so I win on who gets to choose where they need to be.  And we aren’t going to find a better neighbourhood, so I don’t really pay attention to his short lives pity parties about traffic. 
 

We are losing most of our open spaces though…trees are bigger and still quiet, so still best place to be if in Utah. 
 

I avoid Salt Lake when I can.  That does not appeal to me at all. 

SLC is a lost cause. Sadly.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

SLC is a lost cause. Sadly.

I remember visiting my great aunts who lived a block or two from the zoo.  Can’t have been too often, but strong memories for some reason.  The nearby streets were fun to explore, there was a park nearby.  That is how I saw SLC as a kid…that and the hamburger place by the temple Grandma would take us to and the ice cream place Dad loved the best in the world where he would always get burnt almond fudge…both parents moved out of SL as kids but visited extended family often as they were tight and Dad went to the UoU staying at his grandma’s who he was very fond of.  Her home’s backyard ended with a gorgeous green lawn going down to a small river…thought it was the coolest backyard ever.  Bob’s Big Boy and Snelgrove’s.  The ice cream place is gone (we used to drive by its location on the way to my daughter’s doctor a few years ago…thankfully her current one is five minutes away, 7 with traffic).  Don’t remember if the hamburger place is as haven’t driven by there in years, no doubt it looks different and tastes different if still there.  The zoo, of course, is still there.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Calm said:

I remember visiting my great aunts who lived a block or two from the zoo.  Can’t have been too often, but strong memories for some reason.  The nearby streets were fun to explore, there was a park nearby.  That is how I saw SLC as a kid…that and the hamburger place by the temple Grandma would take us to and the ice cream place Dad loved the best in the world where he would always get burnt almond fudge…both parents moved out of SL as kids but visited extended family often as they were tight and Dad went to the UoU staying at his grandma’s who he was very fond of.  Her home’s backyard ended with a gorgeous green lawn going down to a small river…thought it was the coolest backyard ever.  Bob’s Big Boy and Snelgrove’s.  The ice cream place is gone (we used to drive by its location on the way to my daughter’s doctor a few years ago…thankfully her current one is five minutes away, 7 with traffic).  Don’t remember if the hamburger place is as haven’t driven by there in years, no doubt it looks different and tastes different if still there.  The zoo, of course, is still there.

Bob's Big Boy was taken over by JB's and is temporarily closed according to google. Our friend's dad ran the family business until it was sold to JB's. It was JB's Big Boy for a while I think, my friend's sister has the original Big Boy in her yard in Maine. ETA: Shoot, now I'm second guessing myself. My friend's mom was a Broberg her husband worked there not sure the seniority but remember our friend's dad made up some recipes used there. JB's stands for Jack Broberg. 

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
54 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Yep, the "1st amendment audit" community has polite folks and immature idiot rabble rousers.  Nasty Nathaniel is one of the more polite ones. 

In a way, I get them.  People should be able to stand in a public space, and engage in constitutionally protected activity, without being harassed or arrested.  And the fact that cameras freak people out so much, that assaults and arrests are easy to come by, means I can actually applaud a calm and respectful auditor for their efforts to educate and inform people.

But no, inciteful rude [expletive deleted]'s are just immature children.  Probably beat up by their older siblings, and haven't matured into adulthood even though they may be in their 20's or 30's.

These morons have also “audited” domestic violence shelters and juvenile facilities, going so far as to film through windows.  They aren’t just annoying, their actions put people at real risk. I’ve never seen or heard of a “respectful auditor”. How is trespassing, harassing employees and the public, and invading privacy, respectful?There is no need for these “auditors”. They’re just chasing after some perverted vision of YouTube “fame”.   Monetizing YouTube has brought out all the crazies and grifters. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, california boy said:

Honestly the whole thing is juvenile.  If the members just completely ignored them it would just be a boring video of families going to church.  Not all that interesting.  No clicks no money, no harassment 

I agree with how it should be handled and how that would likely be responded to.

I do know about being nervous about having my license plate filmed though.  The charity I am with had, along with other charities, protesters who filmed licenses and put them on the internet as well. 

Having someone next door to me who felt the same way as the protesters with all his friends, my husband I decided that when our teens needed the car they would take his car instead of mine. That way if my car got filmed then it would effect my kids less. I didn't want them ending up in a situation they were ill equipped to handle.

Edited by Rain
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Raingirl said:

These morons have also “audited” domestic violence shelters and juvenile facilities, going so far as to film through windows.  They aren’t just annoying, their actions put people at real risk. 

Absolutely horrible.  Disgusting.  Reprehensible behavior.  You and I have no disagreement here. 

 

Quote

I’ve never seen or heard of a “respectful auditor”. How is trespassing, harassing employees and the public, and invading privacy, respectful?

Well, you haven't heard of them because without the shock and yelling and stuff, they're not as popular.  But respectful auditors don't trespass, harass anyone, or invade anyone's privacy.  From what I can tell, they are absolutely in the minority of everyone who grabs a camera and goes out looking to look superior and play a gotcha game.

Jeff Gray is probably the best of the well-mannered respectful ones.  Here is an example of a respectful audit.  There are maybe half a dozen others who try hard to reach the bar Jeff Gray sets.

 

Quote

There is no need for these “auditors”. They’re just chasing after some perverted vision of YouTube “fame”.   Monetizing YouTube has brought out all the crazies and grifters. 

Oh, most of 'em are, I'd agree.  For every hundred or so jerkwad auditors, there may be one or two who are capturing legitimate abuses from bad cops, or other nefarious public servants abusing their power.  That's the "need" - exposing bad public officials, holding them accountable, pointing out departmentwide abuses and training issues, stuff like that.

Edited by LoudmouthMormon
Link to comment
2 hours ago, california boy said:

Honestly the whole thing is juvenile.  If the members just completely ignored them it would just be a boring video of families going to church.  Not all that interesting.  No clicks no money, no harassment 

Yes, it’s stupid and it’s bullying.  Do bullies go if you ignore them? And hard to ignore when they stand right in front of your car and take photos of personal info that could subsequently be stolen and used by bad actors, or when they are taking photos of your children to put up on the internet.  That in particular is an issue for me.  I take photos in public places all the time of various items.  I try not to include children or if it’s unavoidable, to make them indistinct and I don’t post them on social media without the consent of the parents.  The reason should be obvious.  

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...