On Sep 16, 1:57 pm, wrote:
If you are going to post to Usenet then please at least ensure that
the Subject line is not totally misleading . Are you saying that
someone who has commited a crime should never again be employed?

Why should he profit from his criminal activities? If he hadn't been
arrested for tagging and got noticed they wouldn't have been employed
by those liberal ******* up at elstree would he?

B2003

On Sep 16, 2:18*pm, Boltar wrote:
On Sep 16, 1:57 pm, wrote:

If you are going to post to Usenet then please at least ensure that
the Subject line is not totally misleading . Are you saying that
someone who has commited a crime should never again be employed?

Why should he profit from his criminal activities? If he hadn't been
arrested for tagging and got noticed they wouldn't have been employed
by those liberal ******* up at elstree would he?

But he is only profiting when his activities are legal. It really
requires a lot of stretching of points and disregard of plenty worse
things in the world to be able to drum up the tiniest dreg of outrage
about this.

On Sep 16, 3:02 pm, MIG wrote:
Why should he profit from his criminal activities? If he hadn't been
arrested for tagging and got noticed they wouldn't have been employed
by those liberal ******* up at elstree would he?

But he is only profiting when his activities are legal. It really
requires a lot of stretching of points and disregard of plenty worse
things in the world to be able to drum up the tiniest dreg of outrage
about this.

Interesting logic - because there are worse crimes don't worry about
the little things. Didn't the police use that method for a while?

Anyway , a graffiti vandal wants his tag to be seen. What better for
the little twerp than if 3 million people see it on TV. Talk about
rewarding crime.

B2003

On Sep 16, 4:46*pm, Boltar wrote:
On Sep 16, 3:02 pm, MIG wrote:

Why should he profit from his criminal activities? If he hadn't been
arrested for tagging and got noticed they wouldn't have been employed
by those liberal ******* up at elstree would he?

But he is only profiting when his activities are legal. *It really
requires a lot of stretching of points and disregard of plenty worse
things in the world to be able to drum up the tiniest dreg of outrage
about this.

Interesting logic - because there are worse crimes don't worry about
the little things. Didn't the police use that method for a while?

I am not suggesting not worrying about things. Just suggesting that
if one wanted to contrive something to be outraged about, there must
be easier targets.


Anyway , a graffiti vandal wants his tag to be seen. What better for
the little twerp than if 3 million people see it on TV. Talk about
rewarding crime.

The penny doesn't seem to be dropping that decorating a set is not a
crime. The three million people are no more seeing a crime than if
there was fake blood splatter from acted murder scene. It's
entertainment, with references to the existence of crime. There's a
lot of that kind of entertainment.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, John Rowland wrote:

According to Underground News Sept 2008, pg 654, while a railway
graffiti vandal was on bail, he was hired by the BBC to spray his tag on
the EastEnders set.

Would you rather the BBC had hired a professional set-painter for ten
times the price?

At least then you'd get to rant about the BBC squandering license-payers'
money instead!

tom

--
Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of
indirection. -- David Wheeler

John Rowland wrote:
According to Underground News Sept 2008, pg 654, while a railway graffiti
vandal was on bail, he was hired by the BBC to spray his tag on the
EastEnders set.

I remember that story. I've no idea what "Underground News" is, but
presumably it cuts costs by reprinting stories from six months ago.

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

According to Underground News Sept 2008, pg 654, while a railway graffiti
vandal was on bail, he was hired by the BBC to spray his tag on the
EastEnders set.


Simple "tagging" is, in my view, mindless vandalism. However, I sometimes
look at whole carriage decorations and wonder. I'm not sure it's ever my
"taste" in art but I do find myself admiring the work that has gone in to
designing and then executing the "decoration". In such circumstances I
find myself having an internal debate as to how the person who did it could
be encouraged out of the business of graffiti and into art (or graphic
design or....) in almost a "Good Will Hunting" manner. If we can identify
the person who undertook the design do we punish and then encourage? How
do we find such people *before* they start on a life of graffiti? I don't
claim to know the answer.

Graham Harrison wrote:

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

According to Underground News Sept 2008, pg 654, while a railway
graffiti vandal was on bail, he was hired by the BBC to spray his tag
on the EastEnders set.


Simple "tagging" is, in my view, mindless vandalism. However, I
sometimes look at whole carriage decorations and wonder. I'm not sure
it's ever my "taste" in art but I do find myself admiring the work that
has gone in to designing and then executing the "decoration". In such
circumstances I find myself having an internal debate as to how the
person who did it could be encouraged out of the business of graffiti
and into art (or graphic design or....) in almost a "Good Will Hunting"
manner. If we can identify the person who undertook the design do we
punish and then encourage? How do we find such people *before* they
start on a life of graffiti? I don't claim to know the answer.


I run around local canals on long training runs - some concrete bridges
have the most spectacular tagging, really intricate that must have taken
an age of stencil preparation as well as lots of different cans of paint.

When do they do all this and how do they do it in the dark?? I've ran at
all times of the day and evening yet I've never seen anyone, I've seen a
myriad of other things going on but never that.