Are Yor For/Against Graffiti
This debate is about the modern art known the world around.It effects people lives everyday.
Some people think it's col,I want to know know If you For/Against.
Side Score: 6
Side Score: 3
Vandalism of private property is of course a crime, but I don't see the problem with tagging public property. After all, it belongs to everyone, right?
In general, I think Graffiti is alright. Most gang-related activity (as David brought up) only comes from government's restrictions on our lives. If we ended the War on Drugs, eliminated the ATF and eliminated many other organizations that drive many items to the underground, we wouldn't even have much of a gang problem.
So I say that if the government wants people to stop tagging their buildings, they should figure out why this shit is happening in the first place.
I spent 4 years working with police (I, personally, was not a cop, just an Explorer), and part of it was learning about gang activity. Really, most of the shit they do is only because of the illegality that has been put into our lives. As well, why is it a problem to tag public buildings? The buildings can still be used and have not been damaged (that would cause issues with use of that building). To me, it's just about how people think that they have a right to not have to see things (reminds me of the right to not have to see gay people kiss).
As long as doors aren't busted or shit like that, I see nothing wrong with graffiti all over public buildings. Those buildings are for us.
believe as long as its in a cretin way its a great thing. Graffiti is normanly used by teenagers to express them selves. I think thats a grate thing. As long as we stay of important things like monuments and road signs I think its OK. At lest down here where I stay thats kind of what they do. Teenagers go tagging and they come back without getting caught because they did it in a canal covered by fences. Thats not hurting anyone. So why should we be against something that is keeping alot of people of drugs for a little bit because they are re being creative. I know alot of artists that are only good with spray paint and would make grate taggers but they are so scared go getting caught they don't. I would love to see there art on a run down old building. We need some color in this town anyway.
Er, I don't think it's really black and white, because there actually is some graffiti that improves the look of walls, bridges, etc.
Most graffiti is gang related to mark territory however, at least in cities. It's usually ugly on top of that and often it's written over road signs and other things that people need to be able to see for safety reasons.
I think artists should have the opportunity to petition to "graffiti" specific surfaces. I think it would even be worth the city giving them a stipend if it improves a neighborhood.
But generally I'm for following the law in this instance, and you cannot pick and choose whom to convict for an illegal action based on whether it's pretty or whether you think it is gang related.
So I'm against it at the end of the day I suppose.
The difference between graffiti and art is permission. Graffiti is when a person writes, scribbles, draws, tags or sprays illicitly on a wall or other surface in a public place. The main word being illicit which means it is forbidden by law , rules or custom.
Graffiti is vandalism regardless of how beautiful or nice it looks as it is still the defacement of property belonging to another.
People might say it's a way to express but why not express on something that you own or buy canvases? Many people don't want to see the art that graffiti artists portray s it makes them feel unsafe and it makes the place look like it is not cared for.
Graffiti is criminal damage nothing more nothing less!