Graffiti as a crime
Graffiti naturally describes the round paintings, a wide assortment of markings and sketches that disfigure concealed property. The unlawful writing is normally done on walls of cities, streets, buildings among others. Graffiti is currently a major issue in big cities and towns ranging from all perspectives. This art as a vice is mainly related to bad company, oppressing the law with many delinquent practices engaged. Graffiti has in a key factor been associated with wrong doings and ill image driving purposes towards society. Since Graffiti majorly affects the youths, it is a crime performed on the streets due to misunderstanding of the drawings and images put across. This Norm has majorly influenced the people apprehended to it and their possible clean ups.
In modern cities, drawings and sketches of graffiti are seen every where. Though it is sometimes for positive reasons, these images also pass criminal ideologies. The information brought forward by such images may lead to the commitment of criminal offenses. However, most crimes resulting from graffiti are not forwarded to the police. This is mainly because people in the community do not consider it a serious crime. The police further extend the rates of criminal offenses performed due to graffiti since they do not follow up to convict the offenders.
The effects of graffiti differ in various regions according to the influence posed on the community dwellers. However, crime normally has collective effects on society. Once one painting is done in the public area, it attracts more graffiti drawings hence portraying bad images. These images are done in different ways with different agendas that have a negative effect in society (Ferrell 25). The prevalence of graffiti on to our public places shows the negligible efforts put in practice by the government to control the crime offenders and in ability to protect the people against this vice in the local community. Governments incur a lot of costs in the removal of these paintings. Therefore it is unhealthy to write graffiti on public walls. It is also disadvantageous because it displays a poor image on businesses hence cutting down on sales profit for business people. This happens because the consumers get a poor perception of the images that makes them retreat from the suppliers since it portrays crimes associated with gangs. The graffiti paintings are usually done illegally on private property walls, this leads to wrong communications as regards the value of property since the painting is defaced. The drop in value prices and the ambience of an environment due to illegal graffiti writings discourage formal investments.
The strategic places vulnerable to graffiti include transport systems such as buses and trains, public walls of buildings, bridges, monuments and statues among others (Felson 38). This shows that graffiti crime is done in places that easily catch the eye of the public. For the reason that graffiti often recurs in the local community, it is advisable for the offenders to use paint over colours since they match and discourage offenders to come and repaint. Paintings that do not match with their base mostly encourage graffiti offenders to redo their drawings. This results into numerous paintings overwriting the other hence displaying a bad image. Public places are vulnerable to graffiti since they do not have some one to watch over them and report the cases of graffiti. These places include schools, public places, and locations with an insufficient supply of light.
Graffiti in local community
In the local setting, graffiti directly affects the responsible people managing apartments, school heads and property owners. Other victims also include the government administration since it is mainly involved in the clearing and removal of the paintings. Not only does graffiti affect people directly but it also affects society indirectly. The victims of indirect effects comprise the people who are subject to graffiti in public places and improper perception of the community by visitors. Visitors tend to have a negative attitude towards areas with much graffiti since graffiti is related to criminal acts (Siegel 92). The association of graffiti with crime and rebellion depicts a wrong image of the immediate community. The effects of graffiti are witnessed in the local areas by reduction in business revenues. This is observed from poor use of recreational centres with big pictures of drawings on them. Most public recreational places do not allow graffiti because it drives the public away.
In the local community, Graffiti images comprise up to a quarter of the buildings located in town. These images are placed in strategic places along the roads and posts where they can be easily seen. It is also seen that graffiti images are situated in specific regions of the town while other places do not have any forms of graffiti. This shows that once an image of graffiti is allowed other people are encouraged to impose their own images (Hagan 33). Despite the big sizes of graffiti in the area, very little is done by the police to stop the act. This happens because the town residents do not make any efforts by reporting the incidences to the police. Graffiti artists also do conceal themselves within the community hence making it difficult for the law enforcement officer to apprehend them.
Graffiti of the local town has similar types of drawings mainly based on animation and word drawings. The graffiti is in big sizes with Characteristics passing a negative influence on the viewers. The main affected age is the teenage and youth in the early twenties. Graffiti message of rebellion and lawlessness affects young people enticing them to enter into criminal activities. Graffiti is also common in places with poor lighting systems which harbour ill motive activities. Most of the affected generation is made of men who are students. Graffiti in the place is normally planned since the drawings are situated close to already existing graffiti.
Responses towards graffiti
The major strategies to respond to crimes caused by graffiti include enforcing the law to deal with the offenders of the activity in the society. Even though law enforcement in matters dealing with graffiti seems difficult, the key factor to implement this strategy is by ensuring community residents report the act to the police for action. The community should take collective responsibility for fighting against the vice because it passes a negative influence on the youth in the society. Since dealing with graffiti involves a lot of costs, it is better to prevent the vice in society rather than using lots of funds to remove graffiti on the walls (Miller 55).
The government should introduce different forms of security mechanisms for detecting graffiti before it is distributed in the community. This will enable the community to counter on the effect of graffiti in society. The administration should do this by rapidly removing paintings to quickly get rid of graffiti and reduce its influence. Another important thing required in the area is to introduce curfews to youths who engage in graffiti and perform other criminal offenses (Einstadter 42). The law enforcers should also regulate the sale and availability of graffiti tools in the community. This would greatly influence the community setting and do away with graffiti in the society.
Assessments of graffiti
The above responses are vital for managing the rates of graffiti in the community since it increases insecurity of the area. The evaluation of the effectiveness of graffiti in the community can be achieved by recognizing the amount of graffiti, the most popular types and where it is mainly located. With this in mind, the administration and community residents should analyze the fear caused to the public by such drawings and their perception towards the art. Graffiti creates a negative impression of the community by guests and business people, this makes the community isolated and feared as a den of criminals and consequently paralysing on the economic activities in the community. The community’s leadership should analyze the situation and come up with different cost effective ways of handling graffiti. These assessments entirely help in implementing proper measures that reduce the occurrence of graffiti in the society. They also enable appropriate responses to displace and eliminate the vice (Paynith and Bryan 45).
References
Einstadter, Werner and Henry, Stuart. Criminological theory: an analysis of its underlying assumptions. Chicago: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006. Print.
Felson, Marcus and Rachel Boba. Crime and Everyday Life.New York: Sage Publications, 2009. Print.
Ferrell, Jeff. Cultural criminology unleashed. London: Routledge, 2004. Print.
Hagan, Frank. Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods, and Criminal Behaviour. London: SAGE, 2010. Print.
Miller, Mitchell. 21st Century Criminology: A Reference Handbook. New York: SAGE, 2009. Print.
Paynith, Rebecca and Hill, Bryan. Fundamentals of crime mapping. Phoenix: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2009. Print.
Siegel, Larry. Criminology, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning, 2008.Print.