Can someone please explain all the graffiti in San Antonio?

[Li'l_Bit]

Originally Posted by rd2007

Besides, you have people in their 30's and up in this forum that still think it's freaking art. They'll supply the little POSs with all the ammo they need.
They just need to put out a bounty on them and it doesn't even have to be much. I'll do it for 25 cents per head.

Originally Posted by luckygreeniii

We are not here to debate what is art and what isn't. What is being discussed is the crime of distruction of property. Two totally different topics.

Really?! Tell it to rd2007. This isn't the first post where he makes these remarks. I just responded in kind.

[1751texan]

Originally Posted by Michele164

I have lived in almost every major city in Texas and have never before come across so much.

This is OP's original statement, I asked if she had seen El Paso and Houston?

El paso and Houston are major cities in Texas...wether E P or H-town are third world has nothing to do with OP's statement.

I travel Texas for work and Parts of Laredo, and Houston are bad, and El Paso Has a huge problem.

I dont hang out in Alamo Ranch, I dont know how bad the graffitti is there, but I am up and down in San Antonio weekly; from Lackland to Seguin, and from Spring branch to floresville...There is not a huge graffitti problem.

Graffitti is an unfortunate part of living in a modren society, like wild dogs and traffic.

[Montirob]

Originally Posted by Li'l_Bit

While the art may look like a hot mess to you, to others it's a beautiful work.

...and I agree. I'm all for legal graffiti walls (and regularly used them in school projects back in architecture school); my point is only that sometimes the artistic nature is used to excuse the illegal. I, myself, am torn over some of the elaborate graffiti I've seen on abandoned barns in Europe and over some of Banksy's wit - I know that some (or most) of it is illegal, yet it is so good. But if it were my barn... I don't know. As with all art, I feel that sometimes graffiti artists don't see the beauty of a blank wall that has aged over time.

I think we can all agree that tagging is not a good thing.

[luckygreeniii]

Originally Posted by Li'l_Bit

Really?! Tell it to rd2007. This isn't the first post where he makes these remarks. I just responded in kind.

Li'l Bit,

I think you are missing my point. It could be the freaking Mona Lisa of graffitti but if it is on property where the "artist" didn't ask permission, it is illegal. Which makes the "artist" who create them, "criminals". Debating the quality of the illegal activity is pointless.

[rd2007]

all these "art" lovers need to donate their freaking houses and fences to the trash that does this. You can appreciate it all you want, just leave the other 99.999% of us out of it. It's ugly and it makes the city look like even more of a third world country. The people that do this are criminals and they deserve punishment.

BTW, if you have to argue with almost everyone, you're the extreme minority, which makes you an extremist.

[HillCountryHotRodMan]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Unfortunately, I think churches are fast becoming acceptable targets as well.

Church's??? Alright, they've gone too far now!

Somebody throw a chicken wing at 'em next time you see 'em tagging the Church's.

Where is the decency?!?!

[tgannaway89]

You will find vandals EVERYWHERE. I grew up in a town with less than 10,000 and we still had graffiti. The important thing for law enforcement to do is pursue these acts of vandalism as a crime. Too often they are seen as petty crimes and overlooked. This feeds into the vandals sense that he is not doing anything wrong and nobody really cares.

By making an example of those that we catch (fines, community service, and I am all for a few days in jail!) we will send a message to anyone that may be considering this act of vandalism. It is not just a harmless expression of a rebellious youth.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by tgannaway89

By making an example of those that we catch (fines, community service, and I am all for a few days in jail!) we will send a message to anyone that may be considering this act of vandalism. It is not just a harmless expression of a rebellious youth.

Exactly,
as long as they are not punished, they are going to keep on doing it

[rd2007]

I think we can get some advice from Singapore as far as the proper punishment

something definitely needs to happen. I think we had a tiny bit of it in the parts of the country I grew up in during the 70's and 80's, but it was the seriously ghetto sections of town where nobody wanted to be. There were probably about 5 idiots at most that did it and I'm sure they each grew up to be miserable failures. That's what that type of culture breeds.

[Li'l_Bit]

Originally Posted by Li'l_Bit

While I agree that, when unwanted, spray painting on someone's property is completely unacceptable. If Jesse Trevino or Judith Baca were to paint on Rothko's "blank" canvas, it would be just as much vandalism as if the local tagger messed with it. However, grafitti art is a legitimate art form, but there are some here who have decided that THEY should be the persons to determine what is art and what isn't. Real works of art take time and effort to create and are generally not done clandestinely. A true artist is not going to create something only to have it removed because it's illegally placed. People just need to get it through their heads that there is a difference between tagging and grafitti art. While the art may look like a hot mess to you, to others it's a beautiful work.

Originally Posted by luckygreeniii

Li'l Bit,

I think you are missing my point. It could be the freaking Mona Lisa of graffitti but if it is on property where the "artist" didn't ask permission, it is illegal. Which makes the "artist" who create them, "criminals". Debating the quality of the illegal activity is pointless.

Did I not say this?