Off with his Thumb!

[Tannhauser]

Seemingly, the major of Las Vegas believes strongly in corporal punishment. To the degree where he advocates the 'bethumbing' of graffiti 'punks.' You can read the original article here, even better, there is a video you can watch.

RENO, Nevada (AP) -- The mayor of Las Vegas has suggested that people who deface freeways with graffiti should have their thumbs cut off on television.

"In the old days in France, they had beheadings of people who commit heinous crimes," Mayor Oscar Goodman said Wednesday on the TV show "Nevada Newsmakers."

Goodman said the city has a beautiful highway landscaping project and "these punks come along and deface it."

"I'm saying maybe you put them on TV and cut off a thumb," the mayor said. "That may be the right thing to do."

Goodman also suggested whippings should be brought back for children who get into trouble.

Another panelist on the show, state university system regent Howard Rosenberg, said cutting off the thumbs of taggers won't solve the problem and Goodman should "use his head for something other than a hat rack."

At the very end of the clip, when the interviewer asks "So we'd be more like Saudi Arabia then?" Goodman responds "No, they'd get a trial first."

Perhaps 'bethumbing' is a bit extreme, but should any corporal punishment be allowed?

 

[The Vault Dweller]

They put people like that into positions like his?

...and for Los Vegas? Youd think the mayor would be a pimp or something...

As for corporal punishment its wrong. Sure it helps discipline the children, but when they turn around and hurt each other who do you think they learned it from?

Besides most child abuse is done, not out of punishment, but to fulfill a sadistic parents desire to alleviate their own pain at the expense of someone else's. I mean the sure fact that they cant view a child as someone who could be molded based on the treatment they recieve shouldnt be in charge of a child.

As evidence neither of my parents ever hit me and were lenient to the extreme. Growing up and to this day however I have never done drugs, committed a crime, disrespected them, or failed to help them when they need it. I guess I just learned by parental example.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[Tannhauser]

Individual examples don't count for much. I was spanked as a child (not frequently, but when I did something very wrong). I failed to turn around and hurt other children, and I seemed to have turned out moderately fine. In addition, I would hardly describe my own parents as sadists.

I have also met people who grew up with parents were 'lenient to the extreme,' and took full advantage of that fact. Their parents would be good people, but the children would be brats.

Like I said, individual examples.

 

[Wooz]

Interesting.

In 1999, Gdańsk's mayor let the Preventive Police and SOK (rail guards) a free hand on beating up "the bandits" that kept "defacing" suburban trains. There were regular beatings, often to unconsciousness, of graffiti writers on train yards. The apogeum of this was when SOK guards tied up a writer to the tracks and jumped on his ribs, until he stopped breathing.
The dude recovered after a few weeks in the hospital. Luckily, another writers' crew found him still tied to the tracks when they were entering the train yard.

Thus began a full-scale guerrilla war between the Police and the graffiti crews in Gdańsk. Quite a big scene, the police were outnumbered and completely clueless and helpless to the situation. Since the graffiti writers were beaten to unconsciousness for being vandals by painting the trains, why not behave like real vandals anyway, since the punishment and fees were the same than for amphetaminized soccer hools? Trains were stopped in the middle of junctions paralyzing communication, were scribbled onto, had their windows smashed regularly, paint buckets were poured on them from bridges, crews stopped trains at stations and made "whole-train" block letter pieces in five minutes.

It became a rather big mess. A few movies, filmed by the writers themselves, were made on this subject. After about a year, the police and SOK guards came back to sticking with normal, legal procedures instead of beating the shit out of (often) kids. So trains stopped being halted or downright destroyed by graffiti crews. The Gdańsk yards are still dangerous, but nowhere close to 1999.

One extremism leads to another, and violence leads to more violence. Also, applying Medieval corporal punishment to anybody, especially to something as organized and potentially dangerous to a graffiti underground is absolutely imbecillic.

 

[Mikey]

Individual examples don't count for much. I was spanked as a child (not frequently, but when I did something very wrong). I failed to turn around and hurt other children, and I seemed to have turned out moderately fine. In addition, I would hardly describe my own parents as sadists.

Same for me. And plus, all the people at my school who were allowed to do what they like by their parents and not disciplined, esp. corporally, are now yobs who think they can do what they like.

Yay left wing!

 

[quietfanatic]

...and for Los Vegas? Youd think the mayor would be a pimp or something...

Wouldn't he be a nutty Mafioso?

They summarily cane graffiti vandals in Singapore and it proves to be a very effective deterrent. But that doesn't mean that it is the right thing to do. It probably would not work in America anyway, as you lack the authoritarian system, culture and unique conditions necessary.

I think a little bit of corporal punishment can be good for some children and it should be up to the parents to decide if they should use it. However, I think reasonable legal limits should be imposed.

 

[Murdoch]

The only people who should be able to use corporal punishment are parents. And they should get a license first.

That's right I said it, let the debate commence.

 

[c0ldst33ltrs4u]

OK... so what kind of license are we talking about here? Limited term? How often should one renew it?

 

[Tannhauser]

Requiring a license for breeding rights has been an idea proposed often.

 

[Brother None]

Wooz, you've told that story before, many times, heh.

When you say "writer" you mean vandal, though?

"Name it as it is called", as the Dutch say. A vandal is a vandal, no amount of police brutality is going to make vandalism right.

Though technically a totalitarian police-state would, but that's a whole different story.

 

[Ashmo]

Actually, yeah, you can't have total freedom AND a welfare system at once.

 

[Murdoch]

A license to use corporal punishment? I don't think its a terribly bad idea. It would give the parents a method of discipline and provide legal cover, all the while setting guidlines as to what is reasonable. If the parents deviated from the licensing guidelines they could still be prosecuted for child abuse.
Although this has nothing to do with graffiti in the Danzig subways.

-contemplates a split-

 

[Brother None]

As far as I know, it's pretty difficult to have total freedom and be alive at the same time

But then we get into the whole anarachism thing. Let's not.

 

[Wooz]

Wooz, you've told that story before, many times, heh.

*whacks Kharn with an ebony cane*

Silence sonny! Pay attention when Ol' Granpa speaks!
Gdamn youngstersthesedays.

Vandalist? Out of the law and painting on public property, for certain. Still nowhere close to destruction, as the media blew it up to be, and into what it effectively transformed for a period of time after the police brutality incidents.

You're labelled a destructor for painting on dirty trains and making them look better, covering supermarket and shampoo ads *already* painted on said trains. The "security color" argument is bullshit.

The logic behind this is simple, if you're going to be treated and eventually persecuted and judged as a vandal which only destroys property in name of a soccer club, you might as well act like one. Si on se fait serrer, autant d'avoir bien mis la sauce

Though technically a totalitarian police-state would, but that's a whole different story.

Not really. Stencils and mural art were very common in the 80's in Poland, especially during Jaruzelski's regime.

Not to mention the "Polska Walcząca" (Fighting Poland) sign scribbled literally all over Warsaw during nazi occupation.

Nor the Lorraine Cross painted all over Paris since 1940.

 

[Brother None]

Vandalist? Out of the law and painting on public property, for certain. Still nowhere close to destruction, as the media blew it up to be, and into what it effectively transformed for a period of time after the police brutality incidents.

You're labelled a destructor for painting on dirty trains and making them look better, covering supermarket and shampoo ads *already* painted on said trains. The "security color" argument is bullshit.

The English word apparently is vandal. Surprised me too, but 'ey...

You are destructor when you're "making things look better". The moment the owner of the property, i.e. not you, decides he/she doesn't want this extra coat of paint or, really, doesn't give you permission to do so, you're comitting an act of vandalism. Relative values of beauty, supermarket ads etc. do not change this fact. You're defacing someone's property without his permission.

The logic behind this is simple, if you're going to be treated and eventually persecuted and judged as a vandal which only destroys property in name of a soccer club, you might as well act like one. Si on se fait serrer, autant d'avoir bien mis la sauce

The logic cuts both ways, you've now shown both the police and the populace at large that you're potentially a dangerous, destructive force. Just because you beat the police that doesn't make you right, unless you're an anarchist and believe might makes right.

If I was a police captain, I'd always keep a little military squad handy to shoot you lot, in case you turn all Paris-style.

Not really. Stencils and mural art were very common in the 80's in Poland, especially during Jaruzelski's regime.

Not to mention the "Polska Walcząca" (Fighting Poland) sign scribbled literally all over Warsaw during nazi occupation.

Nor the Lorraine Cross painted all over Paris since 1940.

That's why I said it's different. You're not living in a totalitarian police state, so destroying or defacing private property "in the name of freedom" doesn't really work. Hell, far as I know you're just doing it for the kicks.

Good thing it's not popular in the Netherlands. I hated having to paint over the walls AGAIN after they were once again spray-painted by vandals. Guess who the victim is there? Yeah, not the big bad government, but a store clerk. Well done, "writers"

 

[Wooz]

[...]who the victim is there? Yeah, not the big bad government, but a store clerk. Well done, "writers"

Mostly the job of newbie kids. You can't blame people who take time and effort into making an objectively good looking mural for the imbecilities of teenagers. No self-respected nor serious graffiti writer prides himself in defacing stores or clean house walls. Hell, clean walls, churches, monuments and old buildings are out of line.
Old, crumbling, grey 'projects' buildings' walls, on the other hand...

Also, nobody's fighting the Big Bad Government

Hell, far as I know you're just doing it for the kicks.

True. For the kicks, the adrenalin, and for the fame. Being acknowledged and respected amongst peers is a major driving force for the beginners.

That said, graffiti writers' vandalism isn't anywhere close to destruction, soccer club hools style. I'm not certain you can compare both groups.
In the long run, graffiti sparks interest in visual arts in the kids that started doing it, which allows them afterwards to join architecture, designer or art schools. A number of people I know that come from very poor families say graffiti was the thing that allowed them to broaden their horizons into something more constructive than say, drug-use or joining a gang.

Whereas hooligans are for the most part already part of a gang, if not into a neo-nazi organization of some sort, beating up "fags", niggers, bums, punks, long-haired dudes and just about anyone they don't like at the moment. There's been some 20 deaths from the beggining of the year due to hools, and I personally know someone who lost his legs, after being thrown under a train "for having long hair".

Most of those fuckers end up either in jail or in the police force anyways.

The moment the owner of the property, i.e. not you, decides he/she doesn't want this extra coat of paint or, really, doesn't give you permission to do so, you're comitting an act of vandalism.

Yeup.

Since the polish rail hasn't been privatized, who's the owner of the trains? Furthermore, who rides the trains daily and has to endure commercial spam and a constant, complete saturation of one's visual space with ads, ads and more ads?

 

[Ashmo]

Since the polish rail hasn't been privatized, who's the owner of the trains?

The private company that owns it. Duh.

Furthermore, who rides the trains daily and has to endure commercial spam and a constant, complete saturation of one's visual space with ads, ads and more ads?

You don't own the trains. You don't pay for ownership of the trains. You pay a fee to use the services the train company provides, and usually using the trains as your canvas is not part of the services they provide.

I know that I would be pretty offended if the advertisement I payed for gets sprayed over by vandals. I also know that I'd be pretty offended if the ad that got sprayed over was one I provided the platform (train or other) for -- because a platform that is a frequent subject of vandalism loses its attractiveness for advertisers and thus gets me less money.

The instant you do something to the trains the owner does not agree with or has not granted you permission to do, you commit an act of vandalism.

In my home town companies tend to contract graffiti artists to paint walls of their property for them. Apart from several clubs and other businesses apparently some schools have done that as well.
In that case it's a different thing. The artist is doing his job as a paid professional. He's not illegally defacing other people's property.

The vast majority of illegal "artists" tends to deface about anything and everything they can get their hands on. And the vast majority of them has no artistical talent or can't be arsed to actually PAINT something and just leaves a stupid "tag" or scribble.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Since the polish rail hasn't been privatized, who's the owner of the trains?

The private company that owns it. Duh.

Since when is the state a "private company"?

 

[Brother None]

Mostly the job of newbie kids. You can't blame people who take time and effort into making an objectively good looking mural for the imbecilities of teenagers. No self-respected nor serious graffiti writer prides himself in defacing stores or clean house walls. Hell, clean walls, churches, monuments and old buildings are out of line.

Somehow I have a hard time putting the task of making the distinction in the hands of the police. Looking purely at that comparison, I'd be hard-pressed to make any distinction between one type of vandal and the other.

Also, nobody's fighting the Big Bad Government

Yes. Are you? Not counting the violent war waged against the policy, how much has graffiti done to change Poland?

True. For the kicks, the adrenalin, and for the fame. Being acknowledged and respected amongst peers is a major driving force for the beginners.

A good cause to victimize others for, indeed.

That said, graffiti writers' vandalism isn't anywhere close to destruction, soccer club hools style. I'm not certain you can compare both groups.

I'm not. But they are both vandals, just like a thief and a murderer are both criminals.

In the long run, graffiti sparks interest in visual arts in the kids that started doing it, which allows them afterwards to join architecture, designer or art schools. A number of people I know that come from very poor families say graffiti was the thing that allowed them to broaden their horizons into something more constructive than say, drug-use or joining a gang.

That opens perspectives for government projects. However, considering the small fraction of people talented and interested in the visual arts and the even smaller number sent there by graffiti, "a friend of a friend"-examples non-withstanding, I hardly think this is a relevant factor

Whereas hooligans are for the most part already part of a gang, if not into a neo-nazi organization of some sort, beating up "fags", niggers, bums, punks, long-haired dudes and just about anyone they don't like at the moment. There's been some 20 deaths from the beggining of the year due to hools, and I personally know someone who lost his legs, after being thrown under a train "for having long hair".

Most of those fuckers end up either in jail or in the police force anyways.

Fine, but irrelevant

Since the polish rail hasn't been privatized, who's the owner of the trains?

The state. Or even worse, the public. That means EVERYONE is paying just so graffiti-artists can keep their status intact. Does that sound fair?

Furthermore, who rides the trains daily and has to endure commercial spam and a constant, complete saturation of one's visual space with ads, ads and more ads?

I'm unclear on something. Are these ads paid for? If yes, they make the train-trip cheaper and are worth enduring a bit of eye-sore for and you're ruining the revenue of both the trains and private companies. If no, that's odd.

 

[Ashmo]

Since the polish rail hasn't been privatized, who's the owner of the trains?

The private company that owns it. Duh.

Since when is the state a "private company"?

Could have sworn you said "Since the polish rail HAS been privatized".

Whatever.

In that case, it's the government ministry that runs it. And if they need to make money with advertisements to keep it running, that means it saves you tax money and ticket price increases.