To all the people that are alright with this...

This is ridiculous if your 18 you a LEAGALY an adult if you want to change that go ahead and try in a legal way. But don't you dare try to take our rights away.

On the note of graf not being art or a form of expression your just flat wrong, obviously there are people who are new or are just not good but i enjoy graf more than almost any other kind of art (to me its equal with canvas painting). I grew-up with it since i live in the LA area, and if there where a way to have done it in a legal environment (other than the one completely over tagged skate park 20 miles from my house) than i would have.

so if you want to have a law that will stop illegal graffiti than make a large area in every city that its legal to do it.....

make it legal or graf will never stop.....

To all the people that are alright with this...

This is ridiculous if your 18 you a LEAGALY an adult if you want to change that go ahead and try in a legal way. But don't you dare try to take our rights away.

On the note of graf not being art or a form of expression your just flat wrong, obviously there are people who are new or are just not good but i enjoy graf more than almost any other kind of art (to me its equal with canvas painting). I grew-up with it since i live in the LA area, and if there where a way to have done it in a legal environment (other than the one completely over tagged skate park 20 miles from my house) than i would have.

so if you want to have a law that will stop illegal graffiti than make a large area in every city that its legal to do it.....

make it legal or graf will never stop.....

Also to smitty-

Of course you get differing levels of quality, as with any artform. Some of the things on the Berlin Wall were pretty amazing (says someone who has been lucky enough to only have seen photographs), Banksy's It's Not A Race, offhand, is very well excecuted, and some of the other pieces around...well I reccomend you check out wooster collective or the australian site Die Laughing for a squiz. We're looking at the difference between a fingerpainting and The Persistence of Memory.

I have to agree with some of the people here that the resources of politicians and law enforcement would be better deployed on some of the more pressing issues of the day.

Sounds to me like some are using promises on legislation against graffiti (or at least the sources of it) to persuade those who agree to agree with themselves. Trying to blanket the more important problems? Somebody has to stop this and point them out then.

To every single commenter on here: WHO GIVES A SHIT?

Smitty-

I take the exact opposite perspective. How is that *not* a form of expression?

To "TO ETHOS,"

Well, it's painfully obvious you don't live anywhere near the tri-state area, or you would know that graffitti -- and this proposed legislation -- would affect all five boroughs, including my own.

LOL at "a voice for the voiceless". Yes, tagging "Borf" or "Tamara Wuz Hea" is really having a voice. Puh-leeze.

in parts of toronto, it is LEGAL to tags walls. most notably the alley behind queen st. w, which is covered with by far the most beautiful graf art i have ever seen. one day a year, they re-paint the alleys, which is a wonderful, legal art day.

check it out http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/graffitialley/interesting/

http://www.styleinprogress.ca

I think it takes a small mind, a disturbed mind, easily rattled by assaults on "cleanliness" and "purity of space," it takes a lousy mind to live in this city, to walk around in it, to read the papers and know all the things going wrong and going badly and to think, "What really needs fixing around here is all these marks on the walls."

Let's not forget all of the truly serious issues - like rape, homicide, homelessness, child abuse - in the city that are being neglected in favor of stuff like this. While I recognize that there are government agencies devoted to help resolve all the issues I mentioned, and many more that I didn't, the point I'm trying to make is this:

If we use all of the government's available resources on the issues that really matter, the life and death problems that face so many of the citizens of the city, I think that smaller quality-of-life issues like graffiti will take care of themselves.

And if they don't? Let's worry about them then, when we've got all these other, and in my mind, more important things all settled and taken care of.

Every hour spent by politicians and interns, every piece of photocopier paper used, every square foot of office space occupied for the purpose of taking markers away from adults is better spent in the service of feeding people and saving lives.

tim, you make valid points, and i respect and appreciate your civility. i don't know if anyone else mentioned totalitarian state in the thread so i'm only going to quickly address why i used it.

since the thread is about a court issued preliminary injunction concerning free speech, and not whether graf is right or wrong, i said totalitarian state because i meant to question the extent people are willing to accept or tolerate government regulations in order to serve a public interest. as you know, questions involving the constitution are usually done with a balancing approach involving the state and the individual interests with varying levels of scrutiny. here, the judge said no rational basis. on its face, and without having read the opinion, it seems like a sound decision. (btw, this is only a prelim injunction so it's not like ecko won. you still have arguments.)

now, i don't know what your tolerance for govt intrusion is, but for me, i'm comforted when the govt regulation bears a [insert level of scrutiny here] relationship with the stated public interest and doesn't encroach on the rights of innocent bystanders. i believe that this city regulation is too broad and hurts innocent people. brightliner basically said that people don't need to use such and such for such and such project. but says who? are there rules for art and what can be used for mediums of art? models? sculptures? paintings? do you want the govt to say what you can or cannot use? yes, you want to stem the problem graf, but the question is how you do it without offending other people's rights. where do you draw the line? i think the city here used a broad brush to tackle a "thin brush" problem.

Echh... I get the impression from your last post, Brightliner, that this is really about class warfare for you. Modes of communication that aren't developed through traditional educational programs aren't "legitimate"?

Graffiti has long been a voice for the voiceless. To discount those viewpoints and ideas from the public discourse of the city, chalking their banishment up to legitimacy that can only be gained through traditional systems of cultural capital...

Well, Brightliner, I think it's pretty fucked up.

But what do I know? I'm just some jungle bunny without an education. I don't matter. Not really.

Tim,

All you have to do is read the posts from "Graffiti Writer," "To Ethos" and "ken" to know why you can't get through to these people. The grammar and spelling there, as well as the train of thought that's more like a train wreck, makes it clear they're not the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree. Not by a long shot. If you've ever wondered why graffiti tags have highly unconventional spellings, it's because they're trying, but they couldn't spell to save their lives. It's not that they don't have any other avenues of expression. They can't express themselves in anything resembling a legitimate medium. Honestly, can you imagine anyone who'd be willing to publish "reframe from comenting"?

I like a lot of "street art" also but I have one question-

Why is it when someone suggests the crazy idea of respecting someone's private property (lets leave subways and lamp-posts out of it for a minute) "taggers" instantly reply with words like "totalitarian state" and "jackbooted gestapo tactics" without actually addressing the idea that their rights end where someone else's begin?

And please don't say these disenfranchised youth have no other avenue of expression. For proof look at the example of "Borf" whose work is here in NYC. He was caught and arrested last year in DC and it turns out he was just some snotty rich kid from the VA suburbs.

It seems like if the people doing graffitti had respected private property in the first place then the City Counsel might not have taken such an extreem mesure in the first place.

i think brightliner is on to something. the city should create an admin agency that regulates art because that is in effect what s/he is recommending. spray paint for models: no. but the agency will let you know what you can use and what it can be used for. carry a marker in a shopping bag: no (unless the police says you can because they know what the marker is used for.) carry ink on the person: no. independent expression: no. totalitarian state: yes.

>>>u can not stop graffiti it will be here for ever ,,

It can be stopped, but it depends on what kind of measures you want to take. If it takes jackbooted gestapo tactics count me out.

But I still do not know what drives you to do what you do.

www.forgotten-ny.com

So according to Peter Vallone, it's OK for an 18-year-old to carry a gun in Iraq, but not a Sharpie or can of spray paint in NYC? What an idiot.

At least be consistent...allow people to become legal adults at either 18 or 21.

TO ETHOS!! HOW ABOUT U LET THEM ENFORCE THAT RULE WHERE U LIVE,,,,,,* IF U DONT LIVE IN NYC PLEASE REFRAME FROM COMENTING ON A SUBJECT STRICTLY NEW YORK LIKE...

How about you see it from my eyes yes i do use the tools they band but where does that come in in the process of racking paint? or hittin stuff up if ima break the law its goin to get done in alla counts till im lockd up an back out it doesnt matter where u have one person gettin arrested for carrying somthing an he doesnt do graffiti to the person who does it doesnt matter u can not stop graffiti it will be here for ever ,, cant wait till they ask me for I.D TO HIT A SPOT