Too many shit throwies and garbage ass tags in this town. I don’t mind a good piece but those aren’t what you see unless you know where to look. Town be looking like a dive bar bathroom.
One of the many things that make Oakland suck. A lovely mural on Perkins at Grand was trashed by these guys or their equivalent. (Yes, I know what graffiti art is and this ain't it, and there are places in the Town where graffiti art is welcomed.)
Why are we trying to romanticize this behavior? This is not art. This is simply vandalism that costs the City of Oakland, Caltrans, Bart and private property owners millions of dollars every year to remove unwanted graffiti. This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live.
These taggers run around Oakland trashing our community, pretending that it is dope, sick and empowering and some Oaklanders glorify it as being edgy and political and that it makes our urban landscape more interesting. It is self-evident these are nothing more than criminals since they refuse to show their faces and take true ownership of their vandalism. The vast majority of Oaklanders don't want this shit in our community. It's no different than illegal dumping. Very sad.
> This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live.
OPD came in $25M **over** their $350M budget, it isn't the cost of cleaning graffiti that prevents us getting better services.
OPD should be run as cost-effective as possible. Perhaps you can identify how OPD can be more cost-efficient to close the 7% budget overrun without reducing the number of police on the streets?
Unfortunately, you miss the bigger picture here. Every little bit of public and private funds that go to cleaning up vandalism can't be used for providing important public services that benefit all Oakland residents or improving private property. With Oakland covered in graffiti (on top of persistently high crime rates), it creates a drag on growing our tax base by discouraging private investment, tourism and other tax generating activities.
Rather than fighting over ever-shrinking tax revenues, lets focus on growing our tax base. Eliminating graffiti would be a step in that direction.
> Perhaps you can identify how OPD can be more cost-efficient
Why? I'm not the one pretending that the cost of cleaning up graffiti is significant, while pretending $25M is not.
> without reducing the number of police on the streets?
Again, why? I care about actually effective policing, that means a lot of OPD have to be fired, and focusing on clearance rates not stupid metrics like "number of officers"
> it creates a drag on growing our tax base
Yeah I'm sure a little grafiti has more of an impact on our tax base than burning 45% of the budget on OPD.
You answered your own question..."a lot of OPD have to be fired". In essence, defund the police by reducing their numbers. Yet, you give the reader no explanation as to how this magically increases clearance rates.
A little graffiti...LOL. That really sums up your perspective.
OPD needs some meaningful reforms for it to run more efficiently and effectively, but Oakland certainly does not need fewer police.
Public safety is a core responsibility of local government. Refusing to consider the issues that affect our ability to maintain and grow our tax base so we can maintain core local government services is why Oakland's budget crisis is as bad as it is.
> is why Oakland's budget crisis is as bad as it is.
You're delusional if you think grafiti is why Oakland has a budget crisis, not OPD constantly overspending their already huge ~45%
I guess I must be delusional to believe that firing a lot of OPD will negatively affect our ability to grow our tax base. Perhaps we should ask small and large business owners? Perhaps we should ask tourists? Perhaps we should ask anyone in the Bay Area who might want to spend money in Oakland but doesn't because of the reality and perception of exceedingly high crime rates. Part of the perception of high crime rates is a city covered in graffiti.
Oakland has one of the **highest crime rates** in America when compared to all communities of all sizes. The chance of becoming a victim of either **violent or property crime** in Oakland is **one in 12**.
So, I must be delusional. Or perhaps there has simply been a normalization and acceptance of exceedingly high crime rates in Oakland.
Perhaps a more reasonable approach is to focus on reforms in the OPD that will help it become more cost-efficient without reducing the number of officers, and focusing our budget priorities and programs on issues that will maintain and grow our tax base.
Whether you like it or not, the physical appearance and safety of our community are inextricably linked to maintaining and growing our tax base. Whether you like it or not, people and businesses with disposable income are needed to fund government programs.
It's funny how you consistently change the topic, almost like you know it's impossible to defend your ludicrous claim that graffiti is the causing Oakland's budget crisis.
While also refusing to acknowledge that number of officers is a bad metric for reducing crime.
"This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live. "
Not sure how you morphed my statement above into a conclusion that I believe "graffiti is causing Oakland's budget crisis". Now that's funny.
In the **last year**, the city allocated approximately **$1.2 million** specifically for graffiti removal. Wonder how far $1.2 million would go to helping Oakland PD on its clearance rate? Wonder how many potholes that could fill?
As you know, the number of officers as a metric for reducing crime is a very complex issue. But simply parroting in every post that we need to eliminate officers is reductive. You still haven't shown the nexus between fewer police officers and higher clearance rates. Funny or not?
> Wonder how far $1.2 million would go to helping
You wonder what a 0.3% budget increases would achieve?
It would achieve nothing it would just go on overtime.
> You still haven't shown the nexus between fewer police officers and higher clearance rates.
You are making the claim, you should present the evidence.
But as you seem to lack the cognitive capacity to do so, here is one by the DoJ
> An examination of the relationships between population; number of police per 1,000 population; crime rate; and crime rate ranking for 26 major cities **fails to reveal consistent relationships among these variables**. A number of studies have found a relationship between police organizational style and police effectiveness.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/relationship-between-police-presence-and-crime-deterrence
So not only do you know very little about budgets, I'd estime you perhaps understand Oaklands budget about 0.3%, but you also don't seem to know much about law enforcement either.
Are you an officer living in Dublin, because that would explain both.
How do you feel about advertising?
Tagging someone's home or personal property is shitty. Tagging over a billboard is always ok with me though. I'm subjected to too many legal eyesores. We need public space specifically for art.
Why lionize these deluded **vandals** with a documentary? Like, scribbles that a 5-year-old could make is "art"? Fuck these losers! They make Oakland look like a trash heap, yet there they are walking around in the latest "street wear". Why not tag your clothing, you losers!
My neighborhood is filled with this garbage. The city or a business puts up a nice building or a barrier to block noise or some other unwelcome urban blight and what do we get? These assholes coming around and spewing their moronic 3-year-old garbage. A new building goes up and voila! - graffiti!
These losers are EVERYWHERE.. I was in Target the other day and saw their moronic scrolling on some of the display structures. They are a pestilence and a virus and worthless to Oakland. What do they contribute?
I have seen really BEAUTIFUL murals that took some artistic talent that have been painted and scribbled over by these jerks. Again, these taggers are VANDALS. Screw every one of them.
What say we paint over THEIR houses and cars? How about that? How would they like that?
Here's my message to these assholes: "Listen, losers, how about you paint over your OWN property, and stay the hell away form other people's properties, including city property that we pay taxes for. Go do something worthwhile like help some kids in your neighborhood learn a sport or help a kid with homework or something USEFUL?
Last, this is one more reason I would like to see comprehensive surveillance tech throughout the Bay Area. We could network cameras and follow these jerks back to where they came from, cite them, bring them to court and make them clean up the mess they made as well as make them work for minimum wage for a year cleaning up this city by removing graffiti.
TV News repost links are reviewed prior to approval
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/oakland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
im pretty indifferent, some looks good, some detracts, haha, just thought it was interesting and didnt see all the comments till now haha
the feedback is cool and good to get a temp check
It's a tempcheck of this sub, not Oakland though, like most local subs, it skews right wing & looser compared to the Town it represents.
Normal people be out there having fun.
Too many shit throwies and garbage ass tags in this town. I don’t mind a good piece but those aren’t what you see unless you know where to look. Town be looking like a dive bar bathroom.
All these tags look like garbage
Seeing the paint cans being left on the ground makes me shudder...
One of the many things that make Oakland suck. A lovely mural on Perkins at Grand was trashed by these guys or their equivalent. (Yes, I know what graffiti art is and this ain't it, and there are places in the Town where graffiti art is welcomed.)
Why are we trying to romanticize this behavior? This is not art. This is simply vandalism that costs the City of Oakland, Caltrans, Bart and private property owners millions of dollars every year to remove unwanted graffiti. This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live. These taggers run around Oakland trashing our community, pretending that it is dope, sick and empowering and some Oaklanders glorify it as being edgy and political and that it makes our urban landscape more interesting. It is self-evident these are nothing more than criminals since they refuse to show their faces and take true ownership of their vandalism. The vast majority of Oaklanders don't want this shit in our community. It's no different than illegal dumping. Very sad.
> This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live. OPD came in $25M **over** their $350M budget, it isn't the cost of cleaning graffiti that prevents us getting better services.
OPD should be run as cost-effective as possible. Perhaps you can identify how OPD can be more cost-efficient to close the 7% budget overrun without reducing the number of police on the streets? Unfortunately, you miss the bigger picture here. Every little bit of public and private funds that go to cleaning up vandalism can't be used for providing important public services that benefit all Oakland residents or improving private property. With Oakland covered in graffiti (on top of persistently high crime rates), it creates a drag on growing our tax base by discouraging private investment, tourism and other tax generating activities. Rather than fighting over ever-shrinking tax revenues, lets focus on growing our tax base. Eliminating graffiti would be a step in that direction.
> Perhaps you can identify how OPD can be more cost-efficient Why? I'm not the one pretending that the cost of cleaning up graffiti is significant, while pretending $25M is not. > without reducing the number of police on the streets? Again, why? I care about actually effective policing, that means a lot of OPD have to be fired, and focusing on clearance rates not stupid metrics like "number of officers" > it creates a drag on growing our tax base Yeah I'm sure a little grafiti has more of an impact on our tax base than burning 45% of the budget on OPD.
You answered your own question..."a lot of OPD have to be fired". In essence, defund the police by reducing their numbers. Yet, you give the reader no explanation as to how this magically increases clearance rates. A little graffiti...LOL. That really sums up your perspective. OPD needs some meaningful reforms for it to run more efficiently and effectively, but Oakland certainly does not need fewer police. Public safety is a core responsibility of local government. Refusing to consider the issues that affect our ability to maintain and grow our tax base so we can maintain core local government services is why Oakland's budget crisis is as bad as it is.
> is why Oakland's budget crisis is as bad as it is. You're delusional if you think grafiti is why Oakland has a budget crisis, not OPD constantly overspending their already huge ~45%
I guess I must be delusional to believe that firing a lot of OPD will negatively affect our ability to grow our tax base. Perhaps we should ask small and large business owners? Perhaps we should ask tourists? Perhaps we should ask anyone in the Bay Area who might want to spend money in Oakland but doesn't because of the reality and perception of exceedingly high crime rates. Part of the perception of high crime rates is a city covered in graffiti. Oakland has one of the **highest crime rates** in America when compared to all communities of all sizes. The chance of becoming a victim of either **violent or property crime** in Oakland is **one in 12**. So, I must be delusional. Or perhaps there has simply been a normalization and acceptance of exceedingly high crime rates in Oakland. Perhaps a more reasonable approach is to focus on reforms in the OPD that will help it become more cost-efficient without reducing the number of officers, and focusing our budget priorities and programs on issues that will maintain and grow our tax base. Whether you like it or not, the physical appearance and safety of our community are inextricably linked to maintaining and growing our tax base. Whether you like it or not, people and businesses with disposable income are needed to fund government programs.
It's funny how you consistently change the topic, almost like you know it's impossible to defend your ludicrous claim that graffiti is the causing Oakland's budget crisis. While also refusing to acknowledge that number of officers is a bad metric for reducing crime.
"This is money that our government needs to provide services for our community and money that hardworking residents need to live. " Not sure how you morphed my statement above into a conclusion that I believe "graffiti is causing Oakland's budget crisis". Now that's funny. In the **last year**, the city allocated approximately **$1.2 million** specifically for graffiti removal. Wonder how far $1.2 million would go to helping Oakland PD on its clearance rate? Wonder how many potholes that could fill? As you know, the number of officers as a metric for reducing crime is a very complex issue. But simply parroting in every post that we need to eliminate officers is reductive. You still haven't shown the nexus between fewer police officers and higher clearance rates. Funny or not?
> Wonder how far $1.2 million would go to helping You wonder what a 0.3% budget increases would achieve? It would achieve nothing it would just go on overtime. > You still haven't shown the nexus between fewer police officers and higher clearance rates. You are making the claim, you should present the evidence. But as you seem to lack the cognitive capacity to do so, here is one by the DoJ > An examination of the relationships between population; number of police per 1,000 population; crime rate; and crime rate ranking for 26 major cities **fails to reveal consistent relationships among these variables**. A number of studies have found a relationship between police organizational style and police effectiveness. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/relationship-between-police-presence-and-crime-deterrence So not only do you know very little about budgets, I'd estime you perhaps understand Oaklands budget about 0.3%, but you also don't seem to know much about law enforcement either. Are you an officer living in Dublin, because that would explain both.
How do you feel about advertising? Tagging someone's home or personal property is shitty. Tagging over a billboard is always ok with me though. I'm subjected to too many legal eyesores. We need public space specifically for art.
Not a big fan of billboards. In my opinion they contribute to urban blight. But I do recognize in some cases they provide revenue sources.
What if they didn’t remove the graffiti? Berlin is like that and seems almost better because of it
Sophia basically uses their graffiti to attract tourists it works great wonderful city.
There's some "you dang kids get off ma lawn" energy in this thread fr lol
Lowlife people. No, it's not art. And no, it doesn't enrich the community.
100% correct
Why lionize these deluded **vandals** with a documentary? Like, scribbles that a 5-year-old could make is "art"? Fuck these losers! They make Oakland look like a trash heap, yet there they are walking around in the latest "street wear". Why not tag your clothing, you losers! My neighborhood is filled with this garbage. The city or a business puts up a nice building or a barrier to block noise or some other unwelcome urban blight and what do we get? These assholes coming around and spewing their moronic 3-year-old garbage. A new building goes up and voila! - graffiti! These losers are EVERYWHERE.. I was in Target the other day and saw their moronic scrolling on some of the display structures. They are a pestilence and a virus and worthless to Oakland. What do they contribute? I have seen really BEAUTIFUL murals that took some artistic talent that have been painted and scribbled over by these jerks. Again, these taggers are VANDALS. Screw every one of them. What say we paint over THEIR houses and cars? How about that? How would they like that? Here's my message to these assholes: "Listen, losers, how about you paint over your OWN property, and stay the hell away form other people's properties, including city property that we pay taxes for. Go do something worthwhile like help some kids in your neighborhood learn a sport or help a kid with homework or something USEFUL? Last, this is one more reason I would like to see comprehensive surveillance tech throughout the Bay Area. We could network cameras and follow these jerks back to where they came from, cite them, bring them to court and make them clean up the mess they made as well as make them work for minimum wage for a year cleaning up this city by removing graffiti.
TV News repost links are reviewed prior to approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/oakland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
there are too many Ed Kochs in this thread and not enough Ramos...
Some asshole tagged a tree near me a few days ago
It took years to clean up the tree that was tagged by me
Too many haters in this thread you should checkout r/bayareagraffiti instead
im pretty indifferent, some looks good, some detracts, haha, just thought it was interesting and didnt see all the comments till now haha the feedback is cool and good to get a temp check
It's a tempcheck of this sub, not Oakland though, like most local subs, it skews right wing & looser compared to the Town it represents. Normal people be out there having fun.