The grafitti problem has become an epidemic in recent years, and boxcars aren't the only target. Buildings, bridges, and just about anything that holds still for a time can get sprayed. Rail museums are no exception.

Some years ago, the City of Philadelphia proposed selling spray paint only to those over 21 to help curb the problem. Did that ever pass?

Given the detail on some of the "artwork", I suspect many of the participants are probably over 21 today, though I've never caught one painting. There doesn't seem to be much profanity anymore, mostly just statements that don't make much sense.

Because the paint dries very quickly, one cannot just wash it off, thus tough talk about sentencing the painters to clean off their mess is not realistic. It takes strong, dangerous paint remover and a powerful pressure washer to do the job. Or just paint over it, which is often not practical.

I'm just wondering if any legislation has been proposed or enacted to try to curb the menace? Spray paint is cheaper today than what I paid as a kid nearly 50 years ago, so taxing it heavily might be a start. At say, $8.00 a can, fewer persons might feel the need to express themselves. And it wouldn't kill me to use a brush on my deck furniture, but the pail and brush might discourage many potential "artists". Any thoughts or insight?

The link below from Santa Cruz shows they are working at it mostly by painting over it, which of course just provides another blank canvas for the next time.

http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/ra/Graffiti.html
ryarger@rypn.org

I have a business where we might use up to 2 cases of spray paint a day (Parking lot striping).
So I should be taxed again for attempting to make a living. Ok because it will just go to the customer like you or whom ever as a cost of doing business. I agree its a problem but I don't feel I should be punished for it...WEooly

> The grafitti problem has become an epidemic
> in recent years, and boxcars aren't the only
> target. Buildings, bridges, and just about
> anything that holds still for a time can get
> sprayed. Rail museums are no exception.

> Some years ago, the City of Philadelphia
> proposed selling spray paint only to those
> over 21 to help curb the problem. Did that
> ever pass?

> Given the detail on some of the
> "artwork", I suspect many of the
> participants are probably over 21 today,
> though I've never caught one painting. There
> doesn't seem to be much profanity anymore,
> mostly just statements that don't make much
> sense.

> Because the paint dries very quickly, one
> cannot just wash it off, thus tough talk
> about sentencing the painters to clean off
> their mess is not realistic. It takes
> strong, dangerous paint remover and a
> powerful pressure washer to do the job. Or
> just paint over it, which is often not
> practical.

> I'm just wondering if any legislation has
> been proposed or enacted to try to curb the
> menace? Spray paint is cheaper today than
> what I paid as a kid nearly 50 years ago, so
> taxing it heavily might be a start. At say,
> $8.00 a can, fewer persons might feel the
> need to express themselves. And it wouldn't
> kill me to use a brush on my deck furniture,
> but the pail and brush might discourage many
> potential "artists". Any thoughts
> or insight?

> The link below from Santa Cruz shows they
> are working at it mostly by painting over
> it, which of course just provides another
> blank canvas for the next time.


wooly421@charter.net

Rarely do the threads of my scattered life experiences connect, but here is one topic where things come together. My family spent some time in Philadelphia. Twenty years to be exact. Under Ed Rendell's administration an age limit on sales of spray paint was passed. What was more effective was painting over graffiti.

The psychology of graffiti "artists" suggests that they invest a fair amount of themselves in the painting. When it is painted over the next day, they feel "dissed" and disillusioned to the point of not repainting. We kept a five-gallon bucket of cheapo, latex beige on hand. When graffiti appeared, we painted over it the next day. After a couple of passes, the walls remained graffiti-free.

The hurdle for the harried rail preservation institution is to not give in and to stay at it. Graffiti perpetrators will give up if one adopts a zero tolerance. The "blank slate" that is given by Amtrak and Class 1's is infrequent paint-overs. Then indeed the misguided "artist" is handed a tabula rasa.

Steve

Strasburg Rail Road
ssweaver@paonline.com

> I have a business where we might use up to 2
> cases of spray paint a day (Parking lot
> striping).

I'm certain some provision could be made for industrial/commercial users, who probably buy wholesale anyway. Simply painting over works well for plain concrete walls and the like, but is much more difficult on other objects, which often have to be cleaned, not painted over.

I think the grafitti problem is largely caused by the easy availability (often 24 hours a day) of spray paint for a dollar a can at places like Wal-Mart.

There is no doubt that spray cans are a convenient way of painting, but remember that pre-1950s we did live without them. In those days, grafitti was largely confined to a piece of chalk and "Kilroy was here". A stiff "grafitti tax", which might cause users to buy spray cans only for projects where they really need them, might help reduce some of the blight, which is now almost as prevalent in rural areas as urban.

ryarger@rypn.org

Here on the Naugatuck, we have a special area on the south end of the railroad affectionately known as "the paint booth". This consists of a highway overpass over the top of the Watertown Junction switch where the former Watertown Branch joined the Naugy. The concrete walls of the bridge supports are completely covered in graffiti. Littered on the ground, literally hundreds and hundreds of empty spray cans. We don't dare leave any equipment sit there for any length of time -- it will get hit. We've had a couple of incidents there in the past.

My point is that, considering the number of empty spray cans on the ground, I highly doubt that this paint is being legally purchased at any store. I would speculate that several stores in the Waterbury area are loosing their shirt on spray paint not passing through the register. Why levee a heavy tax if they're going to steal it anyway?

http://www.rmne.org

Philadelphia discovered most graffiti sprayers weren't buying the paint - they were stealing it from retailers. The city then required spray paint be secured at retailers - usually in a locked cabinet. It helped.

The best solution is to remove it - fast. SEPTA was the original victim in the 1970's and they left it on the vehicles which only encouraged more. New management around 1980 installed a working quality control system that keeps the vehicles clean and has resolved the problem.

Electric City Trolley Museum Association

The locked cabinet idea sounds good against theft. They do it at the grocery store with cigarettes, and here in posh Saratoga (definitely an upscale, low crime area) Price Chopper even has powdered infant formula in a locked glass case.

But I do think some of the artwork is done by older individuals, with purchased paint, of which smaller amounts would be purchased if it cost a lot more. I'm sure paint manufacturers would have $1000 an hour lawyers trying to fight any such legislation, but like anti-smoking laws, it would be for the good of society, which I think would accept it.

ryarger@rypn.org

I think jacking up the price of spray paint would be a double-edged sword. It may discourage kids from buying spray paint for graffitti purposes, but it would also discourage them from buying it for legitimate hobbies like model-making as well. It could be argued that such hobbies give kids a positive creative outlet, something constructive to do instead of going out and spray painting highway overpasses or railroad equipment. In the end, vandals will be vandals. Rocks are still free and windows are plentiful, and the only real solution to the problem is better security.

rjenkins@railfan.net

If Grafitti is a problem to you, why are you not doing something about it? You know where the "artists" like to work. If you value the space enough, do something to catch the culprits. Putting a tax of any sort on spray cans only hurts me when I use them for a legitimate purpose. So, you say they like to work at night, you work at night to catch them. I don't like grafitti either, and if it was a problem to me, I would deal with it.

jim1522@aol.com

Besides paint, those diamond or tungsten carbide glass markers can do some real expensive damage to museum artifacts. But we can't easily regulate every cutting tool which is harder than glass!

> If Grafitti is a problem to you, why are you
> not doing something about it? You know where
> the "artists" like to work. If you
> value the space enough, do something to
> catch the culprits. Putting a tax of any
> sort on spray cans only hurts me when I use
> them for a legitimate purpose. So, you say
> they like to work at night, you work at
> night to catch them. I don't like grafitti
> either, and if it was a problem to me, I
> would deal with it.

Well said. The tax proposal is a typically too common manifestation of a symptom that afflicits our society; "Legislitis".

artschwartz@sprintmail.com

The two best ways to stop grafitti is to remove it as fast as possible and to catch the individuals that are doing it. We have this same problem in Wichita, Kansas and when we remove it as fast as we can it sends a message to them that we dont like their "art" and over the past few years we have been known to spend a night at our museum and when we catch someone on our property they get to wear a nice shinney pair of silver braclets and get free transportation to the county jail. Taxing the paint is not the solution, it will only offend people who use the product. Remember when you catch someone spray painting a railroad car the cost of replacement paint is such that the individual can be charged with a felony. You have to be willing to sign the complaint,appear in court and take a ration of crap off of their lawyer but if you stick to your guns they will loose and be forced to pay for the clean up and restoration.

johndeck@cox.net

>You have to be willing to
> sign the complaint,appear in court and take
> a ration of crap off of their lawyer but if
> you stick to your guns they will loose and
> be forced to pay for the clean up and
> restoration.

What sorts of things do the defendants (and their lawyers) do to put you off?

Do they then also have to pay your legal fees? If not, at what point do you throw in the towel as it being too expensive to persue?

Semper Vaporo,
Charles T. McCullough