To me, the logical thing to punish taggers is to make them remove all the
graffiti they put up and twice that much of someone else's graffiti. So,
Reachout on Lake St., for example, which had its 120 foot wall retagged after it
was too late in the season to repaint, could have its tagger required to remove
the graffiti from 360 linear feet of wall up to eight feet high. I am outraged
that taggers threatened the investigator. That's too crazy.
Wizard Marks, Central
craig miller wrote:
> There is a problem with Jan's trail of logic. It doesn't take in the
> conclusion of his desire. The desire being meaningful sentences.
> Incarceration, even if it's just 30 days, works. That is not even a remote
> option. The jail is full with real bad guys. The state pen's are full.
> Law enforcement can't take those livability issues serious with out easing
> up on another part of the law enforcement/prosecution/punishment machine.
>
> Craig A. Miller
> Former Fultonite
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
>
> >I know this topic has been here many times and that's part of the problem.
> >It is still around with no solution in sight. An article over the weekend
> >detailed how the chief investigator will be quitting because of threats
> from
> >the taggers. In that article was a sentence about a $50 fine (if memory
> >serves me right) that a judge levied on a tagger. How in the world is that
> >going to make someone change his/her behavior?
> >
> >Up to now I had always assumed we had a people problem here - that the
> people
> >in charge weren't doing their job. Well now I am coming to the conclusion
> >that it is a system problem. Why in the world are we relying on an
> >investigator to do the work of finding taggers and calling in the police to
> >make the arrest? Is it a system problem in that the policy makers don't
> >think graffiti is a big enough problem to allocate police resource in
> >sufficient amount to get the job done?
> >
> >And it appears that one big system problem is a judiciary that does not
> view
> >the so called "quality of life" crimes as of sufficient importance to hand
> >down meaningful sentences. On this list there is a lot of bashing elected
> >officials, but don't forget that we also elect judges and isn't it time
> that
> >more information about judges and their sentencing habits be made available
> >to the electorate? I realize that is dangerous ground and that a judge's
> >decision are based on a myriad of factors, but I would look for pattern and
> I
> >think others would too.
> >
> >Jan Del Calzo
> >Lynnhurst
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
