Volume 4, No. 1 November 7, 2003
‘Tagging’ a crime By Gene Friedman Graffiti is an age-old issue. Historians can trace the routes of armies and voyagers by the marks they left in their wake. In the past, these marks were etched into cave walls and scratched onto rocks while present-day graffiti taggers use a more modern means of making their mark. Graffiti is to be found almost anywhere. It is no longer associated only with certain neighborhoods or types of property. Subway cars, trains, and buildings, which were the object of early vandals, are not currently the primary “canvas.” Graffiti is now a problem everywhere. It is most often found in public places or those areas immediately adjacent to them. Thus, traffic signs, billboards, schools, and businesses are the typical targets of taggers. These locations share another characteristic in that there is no one with direct responsibility for the site. Buildings with absentee owners or vacant buildings also fit this category and are frequently targeted, as are those areas, which are poorly lighted. Graffiti has become such a modern concern that it has spawned an entire area of study. The problem of graffiti itself and problems associated with it are subjects of research and debate. While graffiti is an eyesore and is a crime, many people still fail to report it to the police. Some don’t see it as much of a problem and not worth the effort of bothering the police. Others feel that the police can do little about it, as it is so pervasive. However, graffiti is a serious problem for several reasons. Some researchers view it as a gateway crime from which taggers can graduate to more serious ones. The general lowering of an area’s appeal can lead to other public disorder problems such as littering, public urination and loitering. Shoplifting is an associated crime for those who need the spray paint and markers required for tagging. Then there is the problem of further property destruction after graffiti has been marked. Broken windows, trashed buildings, and slashed bus or train seats frequently follow the appearance of graffiti. Gangs and their graffiti also lead to more serious crimes as gang tags are used to convey threats or mark territory. Challenges to these tags or trespassing on another’s turf results in fights that frequently turn deadly. In addition to gangs, other varieties of taggers have been identified. The common tagger may make his mark as an act of defiance of authority or to gain attention. Artistic taggers view graffiti as a valid alternative art form and use it to broadcast their talent. Some graffiti may be made spontaneously for excitement or on impulse. Other graffiti may be a malicious act carried out as a result of anger or resentment. When this last category is carried to an extreme it becomes an ideological instrument of hate or defiance. This is frequently directed at specific groups and may well include racial, ethnic, or religious slurs. Whatever the motive for tagging, graffiti is a major societal problem; it is estimated that we spend $12 billion each year just to eradicate it. Additional losses to the economy are incurred in decreased ridership on public transportation and lowered real estate values. Finally, the greatest cost may be in the perception by citizens that the government has lost control and cannot protect its citizens. The resultant fear has a ripple effect, which can ultimately destroy a community. Friedman is director of college security. The Center for Problem-Oriented Policing contributed to this article.
Home | Accolades | What’s the Buzz | Art and About | The Reel Deal Book Marks | On the Safe Side | The Bee Line | Classifieds | Contact the Chronicle | Chronicle Archives