Graffiti artists jailed- bit harsh?

Chat Forum

[closed]

Graffiti artists jailed- bit harsh?

144 posts & 38 voices | Started 2 years ago by RudeBoy | Latest reply from shoefiti

Tags:

Art. Or is it Fart?

Pages: 12…5 Next »

RudeBoy - Blocked

Six Aussies jailed after graffiti spree.

I know it's 'vandalism', and all that, and 'criminals' should be punished, but 8-16 months jail???

I accept some form of punishment should be in order, to discourage others if nothing else, but jail? For talented, creative people?

I think this reveals a flaw in our system of Law and Order; people like this could actually be made to benefit society, not cost taxpayers' thousands in incarcerating them. They could be made to teach art to kids, or people with disabilities, or some such worthy cause, or made to clean up graffiti as some form of community service project. Y'know, something where they could pay for their crimes, in a way that would not see them become part of what can be a very damaging institution. Jail should be for those who are a danger to society. I doubt very much that these guys constitute any 'threat' other than maybe 'damaging' a wall or hoarding or whatever.

We've seen corrupt and devious politicians, bankers and even police officers, get away with little more than a telling off, yet a group of creative people are put in jail? Some of the actions of bankers/politicians etc have caused far greater damage to society, with far longer reaching consequences, yet suffer no real punishment for their greedy, pre-meditated selfish actions, that they know full well will cause harm.

Graffiti art is something that should be celebrated, as part of our rich urban culture. Many a motorway support has been brightened up with fantastic colourful designs. Artists like Banksy have become part of popular and even high-brow culture. Personally, growing up surrounded by plain ugly brick and concrete, a bi of nice graffiti was always a welcome sight. There are a few who will just vandalise bus stops and stuff with ugly, pointless 'tags', but the code amongst the real artists is to create, not destroy.

Any thoughts on this? Free them/hang them/send 'em back where they come from etc?

Actually, rather than suffering the cost of their incarceration, I am not sure why they can't be deported, tbh. Ittud be cheaper than keeping them locked up.

I wish them good luck, for any appeal they may launch.

Long live Graffiti!

Posted 2 years ago #
chopperT - Member

There's a huge gulf between "street art" or proper graffiti, and scrotes tagging your letterbox/fence. Where's the line?

Posted 2 years ago #
Stoner - Member

But photographs recovered from the men show some had also struck in Sydney, Japan, Spain, Italy and Germany.

Police discovered gang members had recorded their crimes in more than 1000 photos, often posing with their damage...

...UK police have been working with their counterparts in Sydney and the men could face further action when they return home to Australia.

Detective Inspector David Aiton said the "primary intention" of the gang's global travels was for graffiti.

"Worldwide you are looking at well over £200,000 ($410,000) damage," Insp Aiton said.

Police spotted the gang in a railway yard at Ilford, northeast London.

On that kind of scale and if they're taggig trains etc then they're not going to get the kind of sympathy that Banksy et al do brightening up dour industrial walls or "quietly approved" graffiti sites like the undercroft at the National on the southbank.

I just wish someone woudl tear this odious tagger a new hole

http://londonist.com/2009/03/tox09for_sale.php

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

Good question. These blokes were 'vandalising' trains, as far as I can tell from the BBC article. We've had no examples of their work.

I really don't think jailing people for such crimes is appropriate. As for 'the answer' to this tricky issue, I dunno. But Toxo9 has been banged up, apparently, and it hazzunt stopped them, as jail does not in any way stop yer serial sex attackers, murderers and career criminals.

Posted 2 years ago #
G - Member

Tell me that when you've just had your property receive the benefit of someone elses vision of art, then had to pay £1000's to sort it out.

Happy for them to paint on their own stuff, and apply for planning permission like everyone else to display it. In the meantime while it is a crime, I would \agree that we should save the tax payers as you rightly suggest, and simply put them to work until such time as they have paid off the costs of their actions, that to include removal, court costs, cost of policing, etc etc.

simples

Posted 2 years ago #
grumm - Member

I totally agree, I thought our jails were full anyway? As you say they could have been made to do something constructive.

Posted 2 years ago #
juan - Member

As you say they could have been made to do something constructive.

I bet there is some room in the parliment that could benefit from a fresh layer of paint

You did got me scared my dear RD... You've missed 2 thread about london, for a moment I though you were
Dead...
Banned...
OR both...

Posted 2 years ago #
ton - Member

community service maybe......get them to clean what they sprayed....with a tooth brush and some nitromors...........

Posted 2 years ago #
Stoner - Member

You did got me scared my dear RD... You've missed 2 thread about london,

the peace and quiet, now shattered...

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

Well, what about, convicted Graffiti artists being made to work in crack clean-up squads? So, if you have your property vandalised, you can 'phone them up, and they will come and clean it up for you, FOC? That would save the taxpayer millions every year, and may dissuade the 'vandals' from trashing bus stops and tube trains and that.

I think spraying up someone's private property is out of order, but the proper 'artists' don't do stuff like that; they tend to stick to stuff where a bit of graffiti won't matter. Like under motorways, and on old warehouses and along train lines. Places where it actually is of some aesthetic benefit, IMO. Many a dull wall has been enlivened by a nice bit of graffiti.

Posted 2 years ago #
david_r - Member

Does seem a bit harsh, but can't stand graffiti personally.

Then again, I live out in the countryside and not some inner city slum

The bit about 'proper' graffiti and just tagging is true as well. Was in Milan recently what was once I'm sure a beautiful city is just a sh!thole now with crap grafitti everywhere.

Just out of curiosity, do these artists decorate the outside of their chav council houses in the same fashion?

Posted 2 years ago #
juan - Member

Mind you when I see the design of the trains, i am not sure covering them with graffitis could be name trashing...

Posted 2 years ago #
cynic-al - Member

I accept some form of punishment should be in order, to discourage others if nothing else, but jail? For talented, creative people?

Some criminals are very talented. They come up with ingenious fraud schemes for example. Maybe we should let them captain our industry?

FFS you TROLL.

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

You could do with your face sprayed up, make it less ugly.

Posted 2 years ago #
JoB - Member

if only they had decent PR people they'd be enjoying month-long exhibitions in Bristol

Posted 2 years ago #
fisha - Member

I think if there were more graffiti projects / walls in areas, then it wouldn't be so bad.

In terms of style and image, I really like graffiti ... i like the imagination of it, and when done well, i find it really interesting.

However, personally, I dont agree with the idea that so called 'artists' should be able to spray anywhere and everywhere on other people's personal property, no matter how good they are and how artful they are, and for them to get away with it scot-free.

The trouble is, that where you may have a few real top notch artists such as the likes of Banksy, for everyone of them, there are 1000+ little shites running round with spray cans from B&Q tagging their own areas with " Young Team Rulez " and similar tat. And its done on everything from bins, walls, poles, windows, bus shelters, the ground ... you name it.

That is not art, its vandalism. And its me that has to go to the doors of the victims and take all the details and then catch up with the dafties and caution / charge them for it.

So at the moment, I think you do need the punishment and deterrent, and for it to remain a crime, in order to minimise the crap mindless stuff.

You'll never stop the likes of Banksy, however if some folk are caught and punished, then it keeps the balance OK.

Posted 2 years ago #
juan - Member

You could do with your face sprayed up, make it less ugly.

Is it the perfect opportunity to use the pot/kettle/black thing WCA tough me about

Posted 2 years ago #
thisisnotaspoon - Member

RB, the problem with gettign them to do somethign usefull like "teach kids art" is that that requires A) you to be a teacher B)to have some knowlage of art.

I can draw a pretty good picture of a boat or a face , just because i was taught how to do those two things. Can't rememeber who Gaudi was though so probably make a hopeless art teacher.

And whats that picture supposed to be, isn't art supposed to make a point or trigger some kind of response from the viewer????? Just looks like a computer?

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

The trouble is, that where you may have a few real top notch artists such as the likes of Banksy, for everyone of them, there are 1000+ little shites running round with spray cans from B&Q tagging their own areas with " Young Team Rulez " and similar tat.

True dat. And that is a huge problem. Sadly, the Law does not in any way distinguish between 'art' and 'fart'.

It is certainly a tricky one. One one hand, you've got the unconstrained creative freedom, and the other, simply vandalism. Responsible artists will get permission, where possible, quite often. But there is the anarchic element; commissioned or tolerated works aren't 'true' to the ethos of Graffiti.

Posted 2 years ago #
cynic-al - Member

RudeBoy - Member
You could do with your face sprayed up, make it less ugly.

resorting to personal insults eh? Might as well admit defeat on that one. And I'm rather handsome, you'd know if you'd ever seen me.

Posted 2 years ago #
Stoner - Member

Sadly, the Law does not in any way distinguish between 'art' and 'fart'

I disagree. The law does distinguish between them.

Banksy has been "identified" or at least if the police really thought there was a public interest case they could nail him if they wanted to.

The "law" is not just whats written in statute. Its a combination of the police, the CPS and the jury's/Judge/Magistrate's discretion as to whether it should be applied in any given case. Thta's not internal inconsistency, it's common sense and I dont think you give our amazing legal system enough credit for it.

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

I disagree. The law does distinguish between them.

No it does not in any way. If you spray something somewhere where you don't have permission to do so, you are committing an offence. That is the Law.

Whether or not the police etc decide to implement it, is another matter. A lot of the more creative graffiti is tolerated, if the building owner is not bothered about it. A lot of the time, it simply is not in the Public Inertest, to utilise police/legal resources, to pursue and prosecute 'offenders'. The Offence remains, however.

Posted 2 years ago #
Stoner - Member

twit rude boy. You've deliberately ignored most of my post.

The "Law" in this country is applied by agencies. Its is not some orwellian automatic indictment. The application by agencies and trial by peers is specifically designed to allow flexibility.

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Agreeable - Member

if only they had decent PR people

While Banksy's work may not be the deepest stuff out there, he is bloody good at what he does.

I agree that a bit of graffiti does no harm if it's had some thought put into it and the location is sympathetic. Even tags can look really nice if they're done well - Barcelona has some great examples.

However you have to accept that if you are writing on somewhere that has a massive problem with vandalism already, like public transport, or vying for attention with adverts that people have paid to put up, you are going to piss people off.

Posted 2 years ago #
don simon - Member

Didn't the judge point out that as grafitti artists, these guys were talented.

Sentencing, Judge Gledhill said: "Each of you are intelligent well-educated young men, hard working and capable of holding down jobs.

"Each of you are talented artists, in terms of graffiti artists, so to have to see the six of you sitting in the dock of this court about to be sentenced is quite appalling."

So they are not being sent down for being graffiti artists, more so that they caused 70k damage.

Ringleader of the graffiti gang - called the AMF - Marcus Wisman, 22, was sentenced to 16 months for conspiracy to commit criminal damage.

Ironically the judge appears to be agreeing with RudeBoy, or vice versa.
Perhaps if the gang had paid for space on the trains like advertisers have, this wouldn't have happened.

Posted 2 years ago #
Stoner - Member

Ironically the judge appears to be agreeing with RudeBoy, or vice versa.

I dont see where.

Rudeboy's rather naive take on the legal system is that committing an offence automatically leads to sanction, which it doesnt. The absence of this automatic link is deliberate feature of the legal system.

Posted 2 years ago #
RudeBoy - Blocked

Rudeboy's rather naive take on the legal system is that committing an offence automatically leads to sanction,

Where did I say that?

You'd be a rubbish lawyer. Don't give up yer day job...

vying for attention with adverts that people have paid to put up

That's an inertesting one. Personally, I hate seeing huge billboards all over the place. some ads are eye-catching and aesthetically pleasing, but most are just a form of 'visual vandalism', to me. Sadly, the Law protects their imposition.

Posted 2 years ago #
don simon - Member

Stoner - Member

Ironically the judge appears to be agreeing with RudeBoy, or vice versa.

I dont see where.

RudeBoy values grafitti as an art form, judge says that as grafitti artists these guys are talented- I read this as judge agreeing that grafitti is an acceptable form of expresion and is not jailing them for grafitti.

RudeBoy says that it is acceptable to grafitti on dead spaces rather than on public property (I know this is open to debate). See above for my take on the judge.

They were jailed for criminal damage, same as throwing a brick through your window. RudeBoy appears to be ranting about the fact that the judge is trying to prohibit artistic expression, when clearly this isn't the case. Up until the point of sentencing, both agree with each other. This is the irony.

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Agreeable - Member

most are just a form of 'visual vandalism'

And a 20-foot high dub can have exactly the same effect. Even more so, as it has negative implications about how well cared-for and looked after the place is. And when it's done somewhere with no respect for the wider environment it really irritates me. There are some **** in Bristol who've done some really shitty throw-ups (quick pieces using silver car paint) on places like the old gaol gates - they should have their hands chopped off.

The whole artist/vandal dichotomy in graffiti has been going on for yonks. The film "Style Wars" details it really well and is one of the best documentaries ever made IMO. In that film there is one group of graffiti writers who really put thought and creativity into what they do, and one twonk who just wants to get his name up there and doesn't care who he pisses off.

Posted 2 years ago #
midlifecrashes - Member

I dare say the train companies spent millions respraying the rolling stock when they took on the franchise to build the brand. Quite reasonable that it shouldn't be defaced, and the £70k needed to repaint is just as much a loss to the as if the "artists"

had broken into a ticket office and nicked £70k in cash. Would 8-16 months be appropriate for nicking £70k in cash?

Posted 2 years ago #
kimbers - Member

Tagging is **** awful but proper grafiti rocks

especially brightening up hideously filthy railway sidings and rotten dirty brickwork that is the signature of british railways

prison time will turn these mild social menaces into bitter, connected, criminally educated tax burdens

i saw lots of good stuff in athens...

Posted 2 years ago #
BigDummy - Member

The world would be a splendid place if every urban vandal was a talented graffiti artist.

It would also be pretty good if every robbery was just like The Italian Job or The Thomas Crown Affair, every murder left an attractive corpse at a picturesque angle and a thorny problem to be solved by an old lady and all street fights involved chinese people who could fly.

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Agreeable - Member

Another problem with graffiti is that the nice stuff, if it's left, legitimises the ugly stuff. Illustrated quite well by Banksy:

Midlifecrashes, I'm sorry that you think of that as vandalism. You could have picked a way better example of worthless ugly daubing. It looks like quite a bit of thought has gone into it. I doubt the person doing it will ever make any money from it either.

Posted 2 years ago #
juan - Member

street fights involved chinese people who could fly.

You mean that is not for real unlike the documentary with steven segal on channel four last thursday

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Agreeable - Member

BD you are on vintage form at the moment.

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Pages: 12…5 Next »

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

Chat Forum

Graffiti artists jailed- bit harsh?

Topic Closed

Don't miss…

Singletrack

Website & Forums

Exits