Urban Bombing

[August1991]

Most cities in rich countries have extensive graffiti (tags) made with spray paint on public walls and structures.

Here is one of many websites with pictures of the graffiti. Here is another.

It seems odd that, while we decry so much else about the environment, we now take for granted these (urban) markings.

Who makes this graffiti? Here is a site showing a typical urban bomber. This site lists the names of "taggers" or "graffiti crews" and the "names" of their members for various North American cities. (I am reminded of the names given in software hacks.)

So, who are taggers - and why do they do this?

Well, a recent sad murder in Montreal sheds some light:

While money, sex, and envy are most often the usual motives why people get killed, a lot of people still find it hard to believe Kachur is dead because he sprayed over another boy’s tag. Known as “Razor”, one of Verdun’s more active taggers, several reports maintain Kachur covered one of the boy’s tags with one of his own.

The Suburban

This link provides videos/photos and ties it to graffiti in NY.

This is the bowdlerized CBC version.

At this point, I am inclined to conclude that Urban Bombing involves young males engaging in stupidity. As sad as this for their mothers, this is hardly a novel insight.

It remains however that this stupidity also means our urban landscape is blighted with ugly spraypainted tags.

NYC famously established a zero tolerance for graffiti on its subway cars in the 1970s. Chicago tried to restrict the sale of spray paint:

Obviously, the exercise of government power most threatening to the paint industry is a product ban law, such as that enacted in Chicago in early 1992. Once in force, the law banned spray paint sales to private citizens, permitting sales only to government agencies, public utilities, schools, contractors and other businesses.

Link

Maybe we should impose a special excise tax on cans of spray paint, as we do on gasoline.

When it comes to stupid behaviour that imposes a cost on others, I doubt "studying the issue" or "finding out why they do this" is helpful. Such studies usually just waste even more resources.

In principle, if you raise the cost of foolishness, there will be less foolishness.

[August1991]

Graffiti is a problem in cities, and I fear that most Canadians do not care about what happens in cities.

Yet, millions of Canadians have to face this graffiti imposed by a few hundred. This aspect of modern society has never been addressed: some people, even a few, can impose a tremendous cost on mamy others.

If we are to have a functioning democracy in the future, we must better deal with such loud minorities.

[Bonam]

Graffiti is a problem in cities, and I fear that most Canadians do not care about what happens in cities.

What? Most Canadians live in cities so how could they not care what happens there? Or do you simply mean most Canadians are so apathetic they just don't care what happens even where they live?

Yet, millions of Canadians have to face this graffiti imposed by a few hundred. This aspect of modern society has never been addressed: some people, even a few, can impose a tremendous cost on mamy others.

So what do you propose? Drastically raising the cost of spray paint thus harming the industry while doing little to address the issue? The people in question could simply find other ways to deface visible structures, i.e. with conventional (non-spray) paint, chalk, or any of countless other methods. Are you gonna impose fees on all of these? The answer, if anything, should simply be better enforcement of existing laws against vandalism.

If we are to have a functioning democracy in the future, we must better deal with such loud minorities.

Framing this in terms of "minorities" is hardly productive. These days, that terms has a connotation of something that must be protected and respected. Let's face it, these aren't "minorities", these are just hooligans and need to be dealt with under the law.

[Argus]

. Let's face it, these aren't "minorities", these are just hooligans and need to be dealt with under the law.

Law? In Canada? Law in Canada is a joke for anything non-violent. You can go to prison for robbing a bank at gunpoint of a couple of thousand dollars. If you con old people out of their life's savings, though, hundreds of thousands of dollars, you're likely never going to see a day of jail. Fraud and vandalism are balooning, but most people don't even report them to police, and police rarely investigate when they do. They're simply too undermanned to cope with a fraction of the crime out there. And the courts won't do anything anyway. Judges barely care about violent crime. They certainly don't care about something like spray painting walls.

In the old days a cop would treat a "tagger" to a trip down a flight of stairs or two and the punk would get the message and find another hobby. That's no longer possible, unfortunately.

[Bonam]

Law? In Canada? Law in Canada is a joke for anything non-violent. You can go to prison for robbing a bank at gunpoint of a couple of thousand dollars. If you con old people out of their life's savings, though, hundreds of thousands of dollars, you're likely never going to see a day of jail. Fraud and vandalism are balooning, but most people don't even report them to police, and police rarely investigate when they do. They're simply too undermanned to cope with a fraction of the crime out there. And the courts won't do anything anyway. Judges barely care about violent crime. They certainly don't care about something like spray painting walls.

I tend to agree, and I think our justice system needs a lot of changes. That's the real problem. Meanwhile, trying to slap on bandaid fixes like an excise tax on cans of spray paint isn't gonna do anything to improve the situation.

[bloodyminded]

In the old days a cop would treat a "tagger" to a trip down a flight of stairs or two and the punk would get the message and find another hobby. That's no longer possible, unfortunately.

I don't know if you're serious about your approval here, but such an act makes the police officer objectively more criminal than the perpetrator he is abusing.

[dre]

I think some of its pretty good!

[Guest TrueMetis]

I think some of its pretty good!

There is some awesome looking graffiti out there.

[eyeball]

What dre said.

With the exception of the odd filthy rich asshole that sprays Private Property or Keep Out on the public's waterfront right of way in front of their places, I rarely ever see graffiti out in the boonies where I live.

[M.Dancer]

I think some of its pretty good!

Some is, most(99.9%) ain't.

[August1991]

There is some awesome looking graffiti out there.

According to you... Others might disagree. To resolve these differences, most cities have strict zoning laws concerning, for example, the height and architecture of buildings. Before a major urban landscape is changed, there are numerous public hearings.

This graffiti meets none of those criteria. Some guy, in the middle of the night, scrawls whatever he wants wherever he wants.

It is absurd that on one hand, we have such a formal and even stultifying zoning control mechanism and on the other hand, there is in effect a free-for-all.

[williat]

No one can honestly say they would support graffiti on their front door for instance, so why should some people have to be effected. Make the laws tougher and make the fines bigger. These guys get away with a slap on the wrist, I will concede that some is very good art, but there is a place for such a thing not on the private property of others. Enacting a law on the paint industry would be foolish and would guarantee nothing but angry consumers.

[Uncle 3 dogs]

I don't know if you're serious about your approval here, but such an act makes the police officer objectively more criminal than the perpetrator he is abusing.

Perhaps an apprtopriate sentence would be "community service",specifically removing all tags in an area and all of his owneverywhere

Edited May 29, 2010 by Uncle 3 dogs

[William Ashley]

all in all who cares, you tag somewhere that isn't yours it can be deemed vandalism, nuff said.

Graffiti is art and enjoyable to see vs. an old decrepit building or old wood fence that is falling apart - it spruces up visual maring - none the less grafiti in the wrong place like on the side of a nicely sculpted religious building or other pleasant place is just not good.

No harm in some areas, definate harm in others.

The tax argument was stupid.

Edited June 12, 2010 by William Ashley

[William Ashley]

all in all who cares, you tag somewhere that isn't yours it can be deemed vandalism, nuff said.

Graffiti is art and enjoyable to see vs. an old decrepit building or old wood fence that is falling apart - it spruces up visual maring - none the less grafiti in the wrong place like on the side of a nicely sculpted religious building or other pleasant place is just not good.

No harm in some areas, definate harm in others.

The tax argument was stupid.

It is all what the end result is, not the act itself.

[August1991]

Montreal's La Ronde amusement park is defending a security guard who ordered a man to cover up his T-shirt depicting Bob Marley and marijuana because it violated the facility's family-friendly dress code.

CBC

In CBC World, T-shirts are controversial, but graffiti is not.

[August1991]

What? Most Canadians live in cities so how could they not care what happens there? Or do you simply mean most Canadians are so apathetic they just don't care what happens even where they live?

Sorry, I missed this.

Most so-called "urban" Canadians live in suburbs. They view graffiti as a passing, urban problem - not theirs. In urban areas, a few too many people view graffiti as "part of the urban landscape" until it dominates their life.

Yet, this urban graffiti, this urban bombing, is our future. In the near future, we will have government officials who claim to control the situation, and we will have graffiti.

Edited August 20, 2010 by August1991