Thanks, Wizard, for the information regarding the study done in Central neighborhood, showing that taggers, as opposed to gang banger graffiti, are usually suburban white youth from 18 to 25 years of age. Question: According to Senator Berglin's bill, how old does a tagger have to be until their parent is no longer responsible for their graffiti? If most of the tagging is done by adults, white suburban male or otherwise, then why, for heaven's sake, is the DFL-controlled State Senate going after their parents?. . . Jon Gorder tells me "you should simply get your facts straight if you want to be listened to", after asserting: "The vast majority of taggers and 'artists' are white." John, please read my posting again. Unlike you, I never claimed that any particular racial or ethnic group was responsible for the vast majority of graffiti. And where do your get your presumably straight facts from? What I said was "So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? Rather than blaming any particular group for the graffiti, I wanted to call attention to the harm that can be done, especially to low-income families, if parents are held financially accountable three times over for graffiti done by their children. Like it or not, there is a perception in Minneapolis, albeit not shared by all its citizens, that inner-city black youth are the main culprits when it comes to graffiti. Many people also assume that the vast majority of drug abuse occurs among inner-city black youth. But an article I read two years ago in the Minneapolis StarTribune said drug abuse is more prevalent among white rural youth. Nevertheless, under our criminal justice system, it's not white youth, but black youth, whether they're from the city or not, who bear the brunt of punishment for drug-related offenses. Does anyone in this forum really believe it will be any different when we start going after parents of taggers? While I'm confident that there isn't any racist intent on the part of Senator Berglin, her bill, if it is passed into law, may very well reinforce existing institutional racism in this state. When law breakers are treated differently according to race and class, as they are in this country and state, then we ought to think twice before trying to legislate away more behavior we don't like. But the proof is in the pudding. If it turns out I'm wrong, bring it to my attention, list members, and I'll admit my error and apologize profusely. Again, graffiti is a problem in Minneapolis. I hate it as much as the next person. But there are better ways of addressing it than resorting to Draconian measures that will only single out a population that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, feel is less responsible. . . . As for the antiwar graffiti: I've seen quite a bit of it lately in my neighborhood, too. Perhaps there wouldn't be so much if our neighborhood war mongers would leave the legitimate antiwar lawn signs alone. Mine has been vandalized twice, and I saw another one in my neighborhood cut in half, altering its message considerably. ---------Peter Schmitz CARAG
Evil is movement toward the void.-----------------Don De Lillo <Great Jones Street> TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
