Comments on: Graffiti Wall Vandalized … By Disgruntled Taxpayer!

By: TylertheKid

TylertheKid — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:40:20 +0000

I’ll go ahead and bet that this ‘graffiti wall’ will stop vandalism about as well as ‘gun-free zones’ stop gun crime.

By: Dan Smith

Dan Smith — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:40:49 +0000

“Won’t work. Hard core taggers won’t use it and rival tagging crews get shot when they use a surface that’s claimed by rivals. You need harsher penalties for the tagger and their parents.”

Gang tagging is different from graffiti artists. Gang members scrawl and shoot each other. The chronic vandals don’t get violent. They will use the wall.

Graffiti walls don’t work though. They’re proven to increase the amount of graffiti in an area

By: greenmountain

greenmountain — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:19:59 +0000

They’re seriously going to clean it/investigate it? Isn’t expression like this the ENTIRE POINT of the wall?

By: D Bozko

D Bozko — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:43:00 +0000

Moodindigo.
Give them time.

Camilla.
If it’s not their property then it’s not ART, it’s vandalism.

By: wendy perdue

wendy perdue — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:27:33 +0000

How do we know Banksy DIDN’T do it?

By: Camilla

Camilla — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:02:42 +0000

Damn, some people in these comments seem to think graffiti is limited to tagging. Ever heard about graffiti ART, people?

By: Moodindigo

Moodindigo — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:52:08 +0000

@ D Bozko

“rival tagging crews get shot”

Not in Cornwall.

By: ted

ted — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:38:32 +0000

I think I peed myself.

Juts tell them Banksy did it, and they’ll fall all over each other trying to preserve it as a work of art.

By: D Bozko

D Bozko — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:38:26 +0000

Won’t work. Hard core taggers won’t use it and rival tagging crews get shot when they use a surface that’s claimed by rivals. You need harsher penalties for the tagger and their parents.

By: DOJ

DOJ — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:31:52 +0000

“most of the cost” does not equal ALL of the cost, so presumably some taxes were used.

and if they need a clean wall for their ceremony, couldn’t they use the other side of the wall?

By: Zombie

Zombie — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:55:59 +0000

Ah! My brain hurts! Too much logic, it’s blinding me.

By: Ali S.

Ali S. — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:47:18 +0000

This certainly sounds like an ironic story. They have to clean a wall made for graffiti so that the kids who vandalize property can go ahead and graffiti on a cleaner wall? Am I missing something?!

By: Evil Pundit

Evil Pundit — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:47:03 +0000

“It is a crime to write graffiti on the Graffiti Wall!”

By: PK

PK — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:31:15 +0000

“most of the cost was subsidised by local businesses who supplied free materials and labour”

That shows how some (most) graffiti taggers writes messages in public trying to be clever without a bit of research. That’s more about ego than truth.

They are going to clean it for opening on Oct 31, ironically. I guess at least the ceremony can be used to diss how stupid some kids are.

By: CountryCritter

CountryCritter — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 20:25:22 +0000

Wow, that sure is clean for a wall dedicated to people who want to write grafitti.

By: Lars

Lars — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 19:46:47 +0000

From the article:
“But it is now going to cost the taxpayer, as we will have to crime it, investigate it and paint over it.”

Uhhm.. What about the grafiti artists? Why can’t they paint it over? I don’t hope the police will actually use any resources at all to find him!