Zik is among the many outraged to see graffiti scrawled all along the Dartmouth Street side of the Copley Square library this morning.
The documentation/photographs of graffiti of the Graffiti Busters and of other City Officials are public records. All with an interest can request the documentation/photographshttp://www.sec.state.ma.us/arc/arcrmu/rmuidx.htm
Anybody who's caught putting graffiti all over a building, especially a handsome-looking building such as the main Boston Public Library in Copley Square should be made to remove it, in some way or other.
A lot of the time, when these vandals are caught, they are made to remove this rubbish. If anyone recalls the plague of "HORNE" graffiti that could be seen all over the GBA a few years back, the police eventually caught up with the culprit and made him remove much of what had not been scrubbed off already.
No Respect!! hope they catch the scumbags, and have them scrub it off.
That ruin it for everyone else. This will be cleaned up by the end of the day.
What hole are you living in? There are WAY MORE than a few!
And is there room for more people?
As I walked by, graffiti busters was cleaning up the last of it at approx 9:50 AM
If only they had sprayed "No Dogs!" then all would have been a-ok
The perpetrators may not be from this town.
drug dealers from Connecticut in town to sell drugs and get our white girls pregnant? Oh wait, this isn't Maine.
10 minutes does not a hockey game make.
At an historic building that sits at the end of the Boston Marathon line and less than a block from the marathon bombing?
Where are the cameras?
Okay...I see two individuals, wearing black hoodies, tagging the library. Now they are running away. Put out an APB.
For the millionth time, cameras don't stop crime.
Everyone loves to cite that UK study from 15 years ago that talks about street level crime.
Where did I say that cameras haven't been used to investigate crimes after the fact? Heck, the Tsarnaev brothers were caught through video footage.
I was merely responding to the original commenter who was astonished that someone would vandalize property when there was a good chance a camera was trained on the building.
I didn't really see anyone "astonished" at what you describe though either.
However, they often help locate and convict the criminals who commit those crimes. The debate as to whether that trade off is worth it is for another place and time. That said, I, and most regulars here, are aware of Saul's position on this point and respect it whether or not we agree with it.
I know several career shoplifters/robbers who only choose a few stores to pick pockets/shopping carts/bags because they know they don't have cameras. They also obviously avoid the stores that have great cameras, because they have seen video/photos of themselves in court before they are usually found guilty.
Nothing stops crime. Yes that is true,
I completely agree with you...very well stated. On another note, I think people are relying too much on cameras being the primary tool for helping with situations like this.
There's a long-lost option that's also readily at our hands, hardly utilized anymore. It's called self-observation, and it could certainly help a great deal (assuming there were people in the right place at the time of the crime). But I'm guessing most criminals would take advantage of the fact that too many people are nose-deep in their smartphone to pay attention to their surroundings (and happenings within it).
But they can be used to deter crime. If a criminal or graffiti artist for that matter knows they are being watched or recorded, they are less likely to commit such a brazen act in the first place.
Its the same reason why lighted areas are less prone to crime than darkly lit areas.
This is a highly sensitive area given its recent history. I would imagine it would be a target for a copy cat fool trying to make a name for him/herself. All the more reason why this area should have more cameras.
in real time.
Yea those pointless worthless cameras and all....
There are also serious substance abusers of every sort sitting (or passed out) on those ledges on both the Dartmouth and Boylston Street sides. It's pretty grungy. Not sure what can be done about that though, They have been there since Day 1.
Sounds like these folks are using a public space that their tax dollars pay for. Not sure why their medical problems are your business.
I'm sure the people passed out on the library during the work week are really overflowing the coffers with their tax dollars.
If it makes you more comfortable to call the 6.25% sales tax a "mandatory donation" I guess we can do that.
So, shall we set a quota for your use of public sidewalks, streets etc. based on your tax contribution? That sounds practical.
No, not at all. In fact I think if you're alive and living within the borders of this country you should be allowed full access to public spaces as long as you are not breaking any laws. Then again, all I jokingly pointed out is that the people likely weren't paying a ton of taxes (which was implicitly stated by the poster to whom I was responding), and I AM replying to a strawman in this current instance, so I've got that going for me, which is nice.
Focusing solely on what I actually said, am I likely incorrect in my assessment? I used to walk by that corner most days for over six years, and I feel comfortable stating that the tax burden of the people passed out at Boylston and Dartmouth isn't in double digits. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
They probably pay a higher percentage in taxes compared to their assets than wealthy people do.
Even 100% of zero is still zero.
Human beings aren't graffiti.
...the unfortunate homeless and/or addicted have the desire, much less the wherewithal, to deface the building. I'm sure the police can decipher the tags, and hopefully identify the individual taggers responsible.
You know the building opened in the 19th century, right?
They didn't have homeless people wandering the public spaces of the city back then? In a previous kleptocratic gilded age where labor was brutally commodified, drugs were rampant, and alcohol was not really regulated?
Just ask the over 29,000 people arrested for drunkenness in the City of Boston in 1897.
And before you try to extend this argument by moving the goal posts, yes, it was not a golden age back then, but the reality is that when the library opened, there were not the people zombiefied on drugs and alcohol camping out and pissing wherever they want. Were I to place a time for the beginnings of this, I would say the 1970s, but then again I was young then.
About 500k people in Boston in 1897, and almost 30k arrests for drunkeness. Sounds like 'zombified' mobs to me.
The file linked to says "offenses committed." That's 29,000 arrests, not 29,000 individual, separate people arrested.
Ask anyone over the age of 60 that lived in the city and they will tell you this crap didn't start until the late 60s.
the library was opened in 1854. Sure there were folks who were homeless then but in general you probably had a lot less of it. Although the "homes" that many lived in were slums (i.e. cramped tenements). I don't know about drugs being "rampant" but there was a good level of alcoholism. Again, though, I do not have the stats to compare alcoholism rates, then and now.
The BPL didn't move to Copley until 1895. Before that, it was across from the Common, in the current location of the Loewes theater, if memory serves.source
and not an actual memory of visiting the library in that location. :)
has a story about vandalism turned into one to bashing the unfortunate folks who are addicted to various substances and/or mentally ill and hang out (i.e. and possibly find some sort of comfort) near the public library (oh, notice the word "public")? Are you just a bunch of angry and/or miserable sorts that you get your feel good rush by picking on those who have more suffering than probably you or I and basically no voice? Good. God.
The last time I was in the BPL no one checked to see if I was tax payer.
Because you and the post by J3 turned someone's relatively neutral comment about substance abusers in the area into an SJW flamewar? The original post just pointed out the existence of the junkies and didn't even suggest anything ("Not sure what can be done about that though"); you and the other post came in here with the angry sense-of-entitlement bullshit.
Oh I see, you're one of those armchair Republicans... If you want to see and deal with those addicts, volunteer at a shelter or something. Addiction is everywhere: from the dilapidated crack houses somewhere in the hood to the posh homes in Gloucester. Gtfo here
Nothing can be done about, that's what. Our office has been complaining to City Hall since 2012 of the increasing swill, litter, human feces, vomit, graffiti, spilled sticky drinks, and congregation of sweaty zombies nodding all over their mess all along Causeway Street near the abutting methadone clinic. Cops keep telling them to move on, business owners keeps yelling at them and cleaning up after them, residents and workers keep walking around it all, BUT IT DOES AND WILL NOT GO AWAY permanently. Period.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Seriously? the Library?!?
"THE COMMONWEALTH REQUIRES THE EDUCATION OF THE PEOPLE AS THE SAFEGUARD OF ORDER AND LIBERTY"
If I had to guess, I'd say that a problem achieving one element has led, yet again, to a problem achieving another.
First Abe Vigoda dies, and now this happens . . . the world must truly be ending
It was never covered in tags like some areas, but this wasn't uncommon in the 1980s, either.
Is that why we don't have nice things? Is that the excuse the state uses for giving us an underfunded transit system that is constantly falling apart? Is that why our parks are so poorly funded in Boston as compared to other cities?
Respect to the ninja tagger who was able to do this without alerting the police. Takes guts to hit such a high profile spot.
It doesn't take guts, it takes a lack of brains. No respect for this level of stupidity.
There was also what appeared to be a deceased homeless person on Dartmouth in front of the church this morning. RIP. Very sad.
I'm sorry to hear that, very sad.
I walked by there about 6:10 this morning and didn't notice any damage. Wonder if it happened later, or if I was just sleepily oblivious.
I heard it happened around midnight as someone supposedly called the police around then. I saw the damage this morning before 9am. It's very sad. Also sad about the homeless person across the street who died.
I think I've seen the tags before while on the Orange Line heading inbound, somewhere between Stony Brook and Roxbury Crossing on the wall that is adjacent with the commuter rail and Amtrak. I could be wrong though.
Rookies that need discipline.
There is a code with writers.
Libraries Schools and Churches are a no no.
and I hope that this guy gets turned in and yes, forced to clean up his own mess. This is a beautiful, historic place that is open and free to all--the last place that should be targeted by this kind of slop.
You seem to know who that clown is, why not turn him in? Also, what about you? Are you a professional "artist" in your 30s who only buys the finest spray paint with your trust fund money, and only vandalizes those evil oppressive government and fat capitalist pig buildings?
I'm very glad to hear that vandals have a code of conduct on what to vandalize and what not to. It makes me respect you immensely.
The Globe reports a crew was on scene this morning cleaning up the graffiti.
Was commuting to work this morning, passing the Hynes Convention MBTA bus stop on the Mass Ave overpass and there appeared to be more tags that looked very similar to these ones. Now I'm no tag expert, so maybe they say something completely different. But the repetition matches, and the tags were not there yesterday when I went by the station.
Tagging is like a space saver, they wrote the graffiti there, that public area is now theirs.
trying to get fame
...was also struck by vandals. No word as to whether these crimes are related, but police in Springfield continue to follow leads on the identity of the mysterious "El Barto".
At this hour, Channel 6 news is also reporting heavy delays on the Springfield monorail due to earlier opossum related signal problems.
It's very important to document, photograph the graffiti artwork before sandblasting/spraying/busting/removing !
When it comes to graffiti, both taggers and do-gooders need to recognize that there's a big difference between an abandoned warehouse or MBTA bridge abutment and the friggin facade of the BPL. Usually graffiti artists (especially halfway decent ones) will respect an institution like this and get up on a building or wall that nobody cares about (Thompson Center in HP, Commuter Rail bridges in Needham, the Bartlet Yard, etc). In return, I'd love it if anti-graffiti campaigners would leave well enough alone in those cases.
The "big difference" is that vandals know they can get away with vandalizing some property due to public apathy whereas vandalizing other property will cause public outrage, maybe even headlines, and get you caught - quickly.
It's all someone's property and it's all property destruction if you weren't given permission by the owner to paint it. Eventually the public ends up paying to clean up those bridges "no one cares about" even if takes a month or three for the T's cleaning crew to bother to get out there; eventually the owner of some neglected factory building is going to have to pay to have it repainted.
None of the three common graffiti walls I cited have ever been cleaned since I started looking roughly 9 years ago.
They go out and spray gray or silver paint over the tagging. With the net result that the taggers have a brand new canvas to use.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Copyright 2021 by Adam Gaffin and by content posters.Advertise | About Universal Hub | Contact | Privacy