Grafitti "artists" pay the ultimate price in Sydney

**Mekk** · 21st January 2008, 20:01

Originally Posted by MGST

There is one word to describe these people - criminals. Tell me I'm wrong. The Councillor said it was a tragedy. The only tragedy was that one of the little pricks survived. Fuckin shame that. I hope the ozzie gummit gives the survivor the bill for the chopper rescue / recovery etc.

I feel I must question your tolerance levels. Why are you so riled about someone spray painting something you're never going to see or be affected by? In fact ninety nine percent of the population will never see it. The only reason you know about it is because of that article.

I know it's difficult for you to see outside your comfort zone but urban caving is actually quite fun.

Please clarify just why you think they deserve to die for that.

**Mekk** · 21st January 2008, 20:39

Originally Posted by MSTRS

It's not art...Grafitti is vandalism and defacement of someone else's property. It has no place in society.
Calling it art only gives the (little) shits ideas of worth, that don't exist. Besides, with the positioning of this particular bit of grafitti, do you really think they were creating a mural? And at their ages, the sprayers should know better.

A lot of urban cavers spray paint to mark that they were there. It's not about art in a storm drain, it's like a trophy for reaching a normally unaccessible place.

Do people really care that much about a storm drain though? It's not destroying its function and as I mentioned above, ninety nine percent of people wouldn't know a thing or care a thing about it.

I think there's just a bit of confusion between these guys and the normal "territorial" taggers.

**JimO** · 21st January 2008, 21:27

Originally Posted by Mekk

A lot of urban cavers spray paint to mark that they were there. It's not about art in a storm drain, it's like a trophy for reaching a normally unaccessible place.

Do people really care that much about a storm drain though? It's not destroying its function and as I mentioned above, ninety nine percent of people wouldn't know a thing or care a thing about it.

I think there's just a bit of confusion between these guys and the normal "territorial" taggers.

how do you know these people wernt joe average taggers, from what i saw on the news the taggs were pretty average............on saturday i saw on the side of a newly painted building....NO GRAFFITY......i wouldnt be too sad if that feller got squashed by a paino falling out of a window

**Robbo** · 21st January 2008, 21:37

Originally Posted by Mekk

I feel I must question your tolerance levels. Why are you so riled about someone spray painting something you're never going to see or be affected by? In fact ninety nine percent of the population will never see it. The only reason you know about it is because of that article.

I know it's difficult for you to see outside your comfort zone but urban caving is actually quite fun.

Please clarify just why you think they deserve to die for that.

It is straight out vandalism, no if's or but's. You appear to share the same view as most Judges do, sympathy for the Criminal and Contempt for the Victims,
If these morons have any talents then there are many legitimate places where they can practice their so called tallents, and these Do Not include my property (again) or Daves front fence.
If you have'nt been affected directly, then you will have been affected in-directly through your Rates and the massive clean up costs that are incurred to local Councils every day thanks to the mindless actions of these arseholes.

**skidMark** · 21st January 2008, 22:01

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Fire hose.

gunna piss on them then?

**Big Dave** · 21st January 2008, 22:03

Nah - too artsy.

**sunhuntin** · 21st January 2008, 22:15

when they built the skate park here, they got some artists in to spray murals on the walls and bowls. looked freakin wicked. now, it is covered in street kid tags and other bullshit.
i dont mind some nicely done murals like i see in places, but street tags just look trashy and have no place.
my boss, last week, elected to no longer carry rattle cans, which is a good move.

id say, while a bit of a shame, those kids got their just desserts. im betting their friends wont be tagging anymore.

**Mekk** · 21st January 2008, 22:43

Originally Posted by jimjim

how do you know these people wernt joe average taggers, from what i saw on the news the taggs were pretty average............on saturday i saw on the side of a newly painted building....NO GRAFFITY......i wouldnt be too sad if that feller got squashed by a paino falling out of a window

Because I know what urban caving is about and how it differs to vandalism tagging. Most of them simply use chalk in drier areas, the use of spray paint is more likely for the practicality of it rather than to piss people off.

I agree, I think town graffiti is mostly ugly and degrades the buildings they go for but this is not the same.

Originally Posted by Robbo

It is straight out vandalism, no if's or but's. You appear to share the same view as most Judges do, sympathy for the Criminal and Contempt for the Victims,
If these morons have any talents then there are many legitimate places where they can practice their so called tallents, and these Do Not include my property (again) or Daves front fence.
If you have'nt been affected directly, then you will have been affected in-directly through your Rates and the massive clean up costs that are incurred to local Councils every day thanks to the mindless actions of these arseholes.

I don't think you're on the same wavelength with me here. I can't blame you really, the article has misrepresented the people involved quite considerably.

I'm not talking about taggers, I'm talking about urban cavers/explorers. There is a very clear and obvious difference.

Most taggers do it to mark territory, to make statements and other things of that nature.

Urban explorers are about finding new and harder to access places. The article put unfair emphasis on the tagging as opposed to what they were really there for. They tag to show that they have been somewhere, like a trophy kind of thing.

The key difference is that taggers do what they do to be seen by any and everyone. Cavers do it only for other explorers to see or for them to see on return journeys there. They don't do it to vandalise, show off or wreck things unlike a lot of taggers.

I agree with you that most tagging in the city looks ugly, devalues and degrades property and is generally a menace but I think you should appreciate the differences between that and what these kids were up to.

**Bikernereid** · 21st January 2008, 22:49

There is a difference between tagging and art. I love this pic and the artists is annonymous but his work now commands a small fortune. He has messages that he wants to convey and does it through art and I see nothing wrong in that. It makes some shitty walls look far better!

QUOTE=merv;1390220]Well they won't do that again http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...764128865.html

So is there some divine justice?[/QUOTE]

**Robbo** · 22nd January 2008, 07:42

Originally Posted by Mekk

Because I know what urban caving is about and how it differs to vandalism tagging. Most of them simply use chalk in drier areas, the use of spray paint is more likely for the practicality of it rather than to piss people off.

I agree, I think town graffiti is mostly ugly and degrades the buildings they go for but this is not the same.

I don't think you're on the same wavelength with me here. I can't blame you really, the article has misrepresented the people involved quite considerably.

I'm not talking about taggers, I'm talking about urban cavers/explorers. There is a very clear and obvious difference.

Most taggers do it to mark territory, to make statements and other things of that nature.

Urban explorers are about finding new and harder to access places. The article put unfair emphasis on the tagging as opposed to what they were really there for. They tag to show that they have been somewhere, like a trophy kind of thing.

The key difference is that taggers do what they do to be seen by any and everyone. Cavers do it only for other explorers to see or for them to see on return journeys there. They don't do it to vandalise, show off or wreck things unlike a lot of taggers.

I agree with you that most tagging in the city looks ugly, devalues and degrades property and is generally a menace but I think you should appreciate the differences between that and what these kids were up to.

Yes Mekk, i do see your point of view and my comments are definately directed towards the "Taggers" as they are the ones that have caused myself and many others with the problem of graffiti and the clean up costs.
"Urban Cavers" is not a term that i am all that familiar with, or their habbits, but i still don't agree with or condone defacing Public Property as the cost of clean up eventually comes back to us all.
Also, operating in hard to access places as you mentioned, obviously has it's risks as appears to have happened in this instance. Was it worth risking their lives for? I think not.

**MSTRS:Me** · 22nd January 2008, 07:59

Originally Posted by Mekk

Most taggers do it to mark territory, to make statements and other things of that nature.

Urban explorers are about finding new and harder to access places.....They tag to show that they have been somewhere, like a trophy kind of thing.

The key difference is that taggers do what they do to be seen by any and everyone. Cavers do it only for other explorers to see or for them to see on return journeys there. They don't do it to vandalise, show off or wreck things unlike a lot of taggers.

Anyone else see the irony in these comments?

Originally Posted by Mekk

I agree with you that most tagging in the city looks ugly, devalues and degrades property and is generally a menace but I think you should appreciate the differences between that and what these kids were up to.

Oh, and at 22-27, they were not kids....