Spice walls up and make them more alive with street art and graffiti!
Graffiti should be legalized all around the world. It trully makes people happier and it is alot nicer to look at than a blank wall. Graffiti is also a way to be creative and express your self
Graffiti is a very beautiful art form that is unappreciated because of laws against it. For some people graffiti is an escape because they are living in a situation where they are exposed to drugs and gangs but they choose their art form instead. And honestly, when has graffiti harmed another person?
Graffiti is beautiful part of the outside world, it's art that isn't contained by a canvas, and in my opinion is the purest, most unfiltered form of self expression. Graffiti can express an opinion, finish a thought and add a unique beauty to the plain industrial world. Without graffiti many would be left unheard. It is a voice for the voiceless.
Graffiti has been around for how long now? And lets face it, most of it is tasteful. Graffiti isn't truly harming anyone, and there are more serious crimes that co should be chasing people around for, not bothering people for writing on the sides of buildings. Let it be legal, why not!
While pasting graffiti on private property may be illegal I feel that this is an art form that is appropriate. Some artists make a beautiful statement in their community. While distinguishing between art and gang symbols may be difficult, this graffiti adds culture to a bland industrial landscape. There is all sorts of canvas and materials to utilize for art. Why not a bland cityscape? There is a difference in graffiti and vandalism. Wanton damage of property should not be encouraged but I have seen some fine examples that could be photographed and placed in a museum. Sadly this graffiti will never be recognized as true art.
If you take the word graffiti to its Italian roots, it means "to scratch". It doesn't mean destroy property or vandalize a wall. There should be specific places for artists to utilize as graffiti canvases, and it should be understood that graffiti is not always an act of aggression or rebellion.
I think that there are two types of graffiti, there is art graffiti and written. Many people express their opinions with graffiti, also graffiti art is very creative in what they would want to say or express and I think that it should stay in the world for people to enjoy.
The world can never be perfect, there will never be one religion, one race, one lifestyle and that is what makes us who we are! If the world look at the same picture there would be millions of comments, all with various points of views. In this world we are faced with a handful mental journeys and attitudes, optimism , pessimism, dreamers, realism, curious, logical... Were all different and we should not be ashamed of who we are, and it should not be forgotten in our heads, and this is expressed by some people and we like to call it graffiti.
In urban communities there is a hierarchy among artists. More experienced or well known painters can squire "territory" which they patrol and protect. They want their "territory" to be filled with meaningful art and to be the best. If someone places a piece using explicit language or vulgar themes in their area, it will be removed by the "owner" of the territory. The government should not be concerned about trying to censor the art because the artists will work it out themselves.
Too often the law is written with only the interest of those with money in mind. Those that aren't used to seeing graffiti (rich people) often perceive it to be associated with other crimes. Considering graffiti as destruction of property is arguable because the property still functions as it did before and graffiti has no real connection to any other crime. Graffiti is often used by the poor to deter rich people from moving into their neighborhood and driving rent up. Of course governments side with the rich because they supply more revenue to the city and ultimately more tax dollars. There isn't a law against stifling economic growth yet. Therefore lawmakers attack symptoms such as graffiti in the interest of the rich.
I don't understand why anyone would say it should be legal. Graffiti is visual clutter. Some of it might be attractive at times but you can't control what people will spray paint on our public walls. People have a right to choose what they see, and graffiti takes away that right. It can sometimes be extremely explicit.
I love graffiti with all my heart,don't get me wrong. But Graffiti wouldn't be graffiti if it was legal. The beauty of graffiti is that some one is going out and risking there freedom for Art. If graffiti was legal the place would be a mess. Graffiti would be everywhere and it wouldn't be as special anymore because it legal. The reason why its so interesting is because Its against the law. I've been taking pictures of graffiti for 4 Years now and this question gets ran by me a lot. My final answer is No. Its the rebellion factor that makes it beautiful. Lets keep it that way.
Graffiti should definitely be illegal. First of all, it just shows a visual melancholy of obnoxious colors and miscellaneous shapes and words. It completely destroys the beauty and purpose of anything that it is on (unless that objects original purpose was to get graffitied). Also, I think it should be tolerated on the owners property only. Even on public property, it ruins what the object could look like to all of us who have any shred of class or consideration for others.
If I come to your house and want to paint a smiley face on the back of your new ride, you should be lucky and consider yourself tagged and proud cause I shared my art work with you and everyone that sees it. Cool, if you caught me doing it you would prosecute me for vandalism. But if you want to go to another public area and tag it with art it is considered art and should be legal? It is vandalism of public or private property and is wrong. And should carry a more severe penalty than just the normal slap on the wrist that seems to carry or it wouldn't be so hip to be out tagging everything.
People would be allowed to put their own art on public walls, and this would give people the ability to spread their religion, and this will cause major issues with people that don't believe in that particular religion. Also this would allow gangs to put threats and other messages out legally. Also this could be used for terrorism and other acts against certain people and even against the government.
"Graffiti" is only graffiti when done illegally.
From the picture though thats "Graffiti art" not graffiti
"Graffiti art" is based on graffiti and stenciling techniques to create art but graffiti itself is usually just vandalism
In which case there are ways to do it legally but most people find its too bothersome. It takes the cooperation and permission from a community and/or the building owner. From which to give the okay. Depending on the community, permission is needed because if the job is done improperly it can make the value of homes go down and people lose money because of that.
If it's not on your property, it is vandalism. Such blatant disregard, and in fact disrespect, for property is in no way good. Should we paper mache your house because we think it would be more artistic than that bland coat of paint you have? No argument saying "but it's art!" is anything but childish. Yes, it can be art, and quite interesting art at that, but that's not the point - it should not be legal at the expense of someone else's property.
Graffiti, like it or not, is art. That is not the problem. The canvas is the issue. Arguments for legalization seem to ignore the simple fact that these acts are committed on someone else's property. Graffiti is the vandalization of someone else's property. Plain and simple. It is no different than keying someone's car.
While I strongly believe that graffiti is art and that it should be considered as such, I cannot agree that it should be legal. I personally enjoy graffiti and love seeing it...I find much of it beautiful, inspiring and deep...But that does not override the fact that it is vandalizing another person's property. Citizens have the right to their property, and unfortunately, so does the state. Legalizing graffiti is essentially doing away with yet ANOTHER personal freedom, which is the freedom to own and protect property. Because of that (and that only), I believe graffiti should remain illegal. Property is one of the inalienable rights, after all.
However, it is an extremely minor offense, and should have a much lighter punishment than it currently does. No one should be thrown behind bars for expressing themselves artistically, regardless of its legality.
All in all, graffiti should remain illegal...However I continue to stand behind graffiti artists and their statements. Graffiti is beautiful, and I honestly wish it didn't have to be illegal. But it does.
According to Oregon laws.Org , “A person commits the crime of criminal mischief in the second degree if:(a)The person violates ORS 164.345 (Criminal mischief in the third degree), and as a result thereof, damages property in an amount exceeding $500; or (b)Having no right to do so nor reasonable ground to believe that the person has such right, the person intentionally damages property of another, or, the person recklessly damages property of another in an amount exceeding $500. (2)Criminal mischief in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §146; 2009 c.16 §5]” Graffiti is a form of vandalism that is according to Oregon Laws.Org,
“Unlawfully applying graffiti is a Class A violation.”