25

Graffiti tagger went on a spree last Friday night


Photo by David H.

Outer and Central Richmond District residents awoke Saturday morning to find fresh graffiti tags on nearby homes and businesses.

Cub reporter David H. says that about a dozen homes or buildings were hit, all with similar tags in orange spray paint. The spree took place from Geary to California Street, between 15th and 25th Avenues.

If you recognize these tags or have any information on the crime, contact 311 – you should also report graffiti you find to them. And if you ever witness graffiti in progress, please report it by calling 553-0123 or 911.

Sarah B.


Photo by David H.

25 Comments

  1. I’m not expert, that looks like gang tags. 707 (Vallejo area code) is also being crossed out here.

  2. there is one by my apartment. its really awful grafiti. The guy has not talent. Look at the 707 and how shakey his writing is. really awful. The 707 isnt crossed out, thats the way he makes his O’s and Zeros.

  3. This has got to stop. Isn’t there anything more the police and DA’s office can do? Maybe the threat of real jail time, a huge fine, lots of community service, or all three is what’s needed. I understand that all they get now is a slap on the wrist. We need to be tougher on these quality of life crimes.

  4. @Ethan – I think the challenge is catching those who do the graffiti, it’s very difficult since most of us are zzzzz when it happens. My head sleeps by my window and I don’t hear them tagging right under my head! It’s such a lovely surprise to come out and see that in the morning…

    Neighborhood watch groups are one helpful tactic (e.g. through SF SAFE http://sfsafe.org).

    That said, I don’t know what the repeat offender rate is with graffiti but I would hope that once arrested, charged, fined etc. that they would decide it’s not worth it to continue.

    Sarah B.

  5. The best way to combat graffiti is to make sure it doesn’t stay long. Anything over 12 hours is too long. When the taggers come by and see their work gone within a day or 2, they go somewhere else. So is this stuff still there? if so, shame on the building owners and residents.

  6. Report it… Why? So the DA. Can laugh in our face? Vandalism is not prosecuted here, which is breeding grounds for gang wars, and we are all going to be in the middle of it, sitting cross legged passively chanting OOMMMMMMM.

  7. BT, have you ever had your house or business tagged? It has not happened to my building, but it has for my neighbor. Good luck matching the paint since, even after a year, the sun fades it to a new color. Even if you are lucky enough to remotely match your color, paint is expensive and depending on the location, can be hard to access. Not to mention, just covering it up, “does not typically make them move on.” I have seen the Evergreen Market tagged, over, and over, and over… there are about 10 shades of greens on that building.

    Shame is not something victims should have to deal with. Contempt should be delivered to those who actually do the tagging.

  8. There is a similar thread about grafitti, vandalism and tagging in Dolores Park on http://www.socketsite.com. Many of the same concerns are voiced. Perhaps it’s time for residents to start contacting the district attorney’s office en masse about quality of life crimes. Hey if NYC can do it, so can we.

  9. What about the parents? Where are they?
    Find the parents and force them to help their delinquent miscreant with the cleanup…sad.

  10. I caught a pair of young hoodlums tagging the 38 bus once late one night and instead of helping me, the bus driver did nothing. When I confronted the pair, a fight broke out, they tried to run and we tumbled off the bus. The driver, instead of calling in the incident, sped off and when the police came, they did nothing saying I looked fine. I had bruise on my face and I would later find more on my body & legs.

    It was heavy set hispanic kid with a 49er ski cap and an Chinese kid clad in black. They probably live around the area. The only consolation I have is that I took on a 250+lb kid and inflicted severe stress to his eyeballs.

  11. BT – taggers are like dogs, they can’t help themselves so we have to help them by remove their tools and ability to tag in the future. Like dogs who have to urinate to mark their territories; taggers uncontrollable urges could be tempered by those caught be paraded around with scarlet letters, forced to pay for the damages and publicly humiliated while cleaning theirs and others tags thus repaying their debt to society.

  12. This neighborhood and town is going so downhill and it just breaks my heart. BTW it isn’t necessarily “kids” doing this.

  13. Surveillance cameras! Why don’t we deploy these cameras on EVERY street in San Francisco. They have been shown to deter a lot of crime (not all).

    Also, local citizens could create a “graffiti watch”, but that would entail hunkering down in one’s car, near places that are likely graffiti targets, and filming. Given the scofflaw scum that do the tagging, that might be too dangerous for a citizen.

    A LOT of this comes from late night losers who are staggering out of the bars around here at 2am, and tagging on the way back to their homes, or their cars (many of these losers come from out of neighborhood).

    Penalties? There needs to be SERIOUS penalties for this kind of vandalism.

    First offense: ONE YEAR of public service on EVERY WEEKEND, cleaning up graffiti.

    Second offense: Confiscation of all vehicles used to transport graffiti “losers” (these creeps are not “artists”)

    Third offense: jail time.

    Also, how about the occasional unmarked police car, staked out near likely graffiti spots?

    All said, this is VERY frustrating, because it brings down the demeanor of the neighborhood, encourages copycats, and demoralizes residents.

  14. For those who asked, I live in a condo and it has been tagged but we do as I suggested–remove the tags the same day we find them. And although we are in a pretty “risky” location, getting tagged has become a rare event because we work hard at removing them. I’m not suggesting letting taggers off easy or anything else other than a practical suggestion that works for us. if you don’t want to buy the paint or work a little at getting the color close enough (my whole life, when I paint something I have saved the can so I can do touch-ups and later match the color, and adding a little white adjusts for fading), it’s your option. Do as you like. But if you leave tags in place long enough for the taggers to get satisfaction, they’ll do it again.

  15. @Phil Cameras everywhere? Are you kidding me? I do not graffiti or commit any other crimes for that matter but I do not want to be on camera. It is no bodies business what I or anyone else is does when they are out and about.

  16. Ron, Surveillance cameras do not “watch” you. They record all activities are are reviewed ONLY when a crime is committed. They are also a great deterrent.

    example: when you are “out and about” and a cop is parked at the curb, and he watches you as you walk by and out of sight, does that offend you? Same thing.

    We have to find ways to stop anonymous crime. I would rather be on passive surveillance (not watched, but recorded) so as to enable me and my neighbors to feel more safe, and make criminals KNOW that someone is watching.

    If we still had public pillories, I would vote for placing taggers in stocks, for several days, with their name printed for everyone to see. Same with these local petty thieves. I am sick and tired of a few scofflaws ruining it for the rest of us! My safety and my neighbor’s safety is far more important to me than whether a passive camera is accessed to see who created a crime in our neighborhood. It tales a village!

  17. Who is to say that these cameras would only be viewed when a crime is committed? How can you trust random strangers to that. The people in the government are just regular joes. Some good apples and some bad apples. Would you allow someone to have access to your mail box? You probably don’t have anything bad in your mail but you still don’t want anyone reading it.

  18. Cameras may seem like a nifty idea; but, who is going to pay for the installation and the data servers (including the maintenance) needed for the passive collection of video?

    What prevents cameras from being stolen or vandalized by disguised suspects? If suspects are not being caught doing graffiti it is unlikely they would be caught doing damage or stealing cameras in the dead of night. If we go with the idea of let’s look at everyone that looked at the camera too long on a given day, then we venture into the invasion of privacy.

    Obviously, there is no easy solution. However, greater nighttime patrolling and prosecution with judgments that include stiff penalties such as fines that make a hit on the pocketbook, probation, and hours of community clean up (the on that was vandalized).

  19. Ron said: “Who is to say that these cameras would only be viewed when a crime is committed? How can you trust random strangers to that. The people in the government are just regular joes. Some good apples and some bad apples. Would you allow someone to have access to your mail box? You probably don’t have anything bad in your mail but you still don’t want anyone reading it.”

    Ron,
    Would you rather have the small fraction of people (probably 1-2%) in controlled surveillance environments who abuse their responsibility by “active watching”, or have crime reduced in your neighborhood. Most advantages have trade-offs. So, when on the one hand we are complaining about the neighborhood going downhill, and the other hand worry obsessively about the remote possibility of a surveillance officer laughing as she watches you slobber your coat as you walk down the street with a 7-11 hot dog – one wonders what the priorities really are.

    The fact is that anonymity helps to enable crime – both large and small. There is a trade off. Why do these jerks tag, aside from the fact that their breeding leaves something to be desired? They tag *because they know that they can get away with it*. Catch them – even retroactively – in the act, and make them PAY. Then, watch things change.

    mel Said: “”Cameras may seem like a nifty idea; but, who is going to pay for the installation and the data servers (including the maintenance) needed for the passive collection of video? ”

    Alternately, who is going to pay for the repair and cleanup of this epidemic of vandalism, street crime, and tagging? Either way, there is a cost. You want more patrols? Fine. I want to hear you lobby for more taxes to pay for those patrols. Who pays for crime? Citizens do. Re-painting a commercial facade results in a cost that *is passed on to consumers* – i.e. you, and me. Citizens fearing to get on a bus, or walk to a mid-evening movie means less revenue for those businesses, and less tax base for the city.

    Cameras and maintenance costs – including automated monitoring – are trivial compared to the larger capital and social costs of crime, period. Cameras don’t solve everything, but they are clear deterrents; and, those perps that don’t get deterred have a better chance of getting caught.

    Also, vandalizing cameras is not as easy as one might think. In fact, most of these perps are not too bright; they blithely think that they can get away with stuff, so that’s why they do it. Put a few of their mugs on a surveillance ‘walk”, and word will spread. We will always have crime, but we don’t have to stand around twiddling our thumbs wishing for more police protection that won’t happen (the cops are already over-subscribed, and too much disrespected). Cops, and citizens, should cooperate to put technology to work, against the criminals.

  20. Phil, there’s crime and then there’s crime. I do not want my personal privacy invaded by security cameras everywhere so we can identify young kids who tag. Frankly, if I lived in a neighborhood that I thought required security cameras everywhere (due to violent person-on-person crime), it would be time to move.

    There’s plenty of other things we can do (paint over graffitied property ASAP, as one commenter has suggested repeatedly, and post flyers offering monetary awards for revealing kids who tag are but two).

    Concerning how we deal with kids who tag, I’m very much in favor of restorative justice methods. Once a graffiti tagger is identified and charged, we force him to meet with property owners and residents he has harmed with his “artwork.” The property owners and residents talk about what effect his (or her) vandalism had on them, and then the graffiti tagger and his (or her) victims negociate what the “punishment” will be.

  21. Sarah B.: “I don’t know what the repeat offender rate is with graffiti but I would hope that once arrested, charged, fined etc. that they would decide it’s not worth it to continue. ”

    Agreed! If the penalty is stiff and *elongated* (see below), the offenders most often decide it’s not worth it.

    Cynthia: “I do not want my personal privacy invaded by security cameras everywhere so we can identify young kids who tag.”

    and

    “I’m very much in favor of restorative justice methods. Once a graffiti tagger is identified and charged, we force him to meet with property owners and residents he has harmed with his “artwork.” The property owners and residents talk about what effect his (or her) vandalism had on them, and then the graffiti tagger and his (or her) victims negociate what the “punishment” will be.”

    Cynthia, What about your right to privacy and security regarding your property. MANY democratic nations deploy security cameras, and there are very, very few abuses. With due respect, calling property surveillance a crime is a bit over the top. Every time you walk into a retail location, bank, airport, etc. etc. etc you are under surveillance. Is that a crime?

    Young kids? The majority of these creeps are in their late teens and early adulthood; they are marking OUR buildings as THEIR gang or other territory. Young kids? Sorry, they’re young CRIMINALS, who have created the CRIME of ruining someone’s property, and causing the latter to spend his/her own money to fix the problem.

    Also, as for “restorative methods”; this is a straight path to recidivism and continued disrespect for property. I was, at one time, a retail operator. If someone marked up my building, the LAST thing I would want to be burdened with would be “negotiating” with the slime bucket who defaced my property and made my hard work and investment in the business look like a gang-banger location. If I’m a retailer, I want to see the sheer lack of respect, most often accompanied by the a punk attitude (I have lived this!) **punished** in a way that will keep the offender from NEVER forgetting what they have done. Something like compelled public service of cleaning graffiti for ONE YEAR, on weekends. How about that. Why should I use my valuable time to deal with a criminal? I have no interest in “saving” (mostly adult) miscreants who destroy my property. Walk in a retailer’s shoes for a few years and you might take a different tack.

    btw, surveillance cameras are not the answer to all crime, but they are great deterrence. Most people who object to surveillance have no idea how much they’re already watched, anyway. Surveillance is a law enforcement tool, and like all tools it can be abused. When its abused, then we, in a democratic society, punish the offenders. We don’t take powerful crime deterrent tools away from the police just because there are a few rotten cops.

  22. A couple of months ago a couple of blocks from around 46th ave to 43rd on Balboa were also tagged. Seems like it was the same “artist” too. Definitely the same color.

  23. Phil, I think that calling graffiti dangerous is rather dramatic. I realize that it pisses you off, but it is really not that serious. Last week 3 young women were raped at knife point in their cars while the people whose houses these violent crimes were happening in front of, did nothing. I think that San Francisco has way bigger fish to fry with a serial rapist on the loose in the Park District. I agree that these tags are ugly, but they didn’t hurt anyone, they just made your property ugly. It is somewhat annoying, but it is not worth spending tax money on. Maybe that money you are proposing be spent on surveillance could be funneled into the school system to fund art programs so that these kids can at least draw pretty pictures on our walls. I’d rather see graffiti than blood on our streets… Let’s all get right sized about this topic! Seriously!

  24. Jwennifer, It’s horrific to contemplate that rapes happened anywhere – no less in the Richmond. That said, using a more serious crime, like rape, to diminish the overall negative impact of something like tagging, is, I believe, wrong-headed.

    I have called for surveillance cameras to deter tagging. Although I didn’t mention surveillance cameras as a deterrent to other crimes, they are! Why don;t we have those cameras up? How much does the cleaning of graffiti; the loss of property by theft; the loss of general peace of mind due to violent crime add up to – compared to the cost of placing surveillance cameras? If we had good electronic surveillance in the Richmond – in fact, throughout all of San Francisco – it would create a chilling effect for those who are up to no good, and would help to apprehend many of those who commit havoc and mayhem, from tagging, to street-crime, to violent personal attacks.

    Trying to conflate spending money on tagging with an increase in “blood on our streets” is quite a rhetorical stretch! I’m not buying it, and I don;t think that many other people would, either.

    Back to tagging: Tagging is often used by used by scum in *gangs* to mark their “territory”. When a member of another gang sees a tag, they will try to overwrite it, or make an adjacent tag. Tagging *encourages* scum gang members to frequent neighborhoods where tags are placed and not taken down. Aside from gang members, tagging is also engaged in by irresponsible destroyers of someone’s property (*never* their own property!). Taggers of the latter sort think it’s “cool” to mark up commercial properties. This is nothing more than theft, plain and simple! Tags require a building or business owner to have to spend time and money to remove the tag, or be fined by the city. Thus, the theft of the property owners time, and money. the money spent by the business owner is passed on to consumers, as an added cost of doing business. Thus, people end up having to spend more for goods and services because some loser decides that it’s “cool” to mark up a building. If it was possible, I would have the scum that engage in tagging put into public pillories for a few days, where everyone could see their faces, with their name plastered for all to see. Shame them!

    Back to rape: Rape is a most reprehensible crime. We need to do a lot more to protect women from the human trash that use rape as a power weapon. Surveillance cameras could help with that.

    Rapists, taggers, thieves, etc. are ALL emboldened when they think they can commit a crime in anonymity – when no one is watching. I want to END that advantage; I want to take away the criminal’s sense that s/he is not being seen – no matter the crime.

    In fact, the more surveillance, the better – and along with surveillance, extra-strong diligence to make sure that surveillance is not abused. This is not about creating another USSR; it’s about using technology that has been available for a few decades – along with biometric technology (face recognition, etc.) – that will take the anonymity out of crime.

    The next time a horrible crime happens in the Richmond, or anywhere else, think about what having a surveillance camera might have meant in terms of apprehension, after the fact. Or, think about whether a criminal might think twice before creating a “crime of opportunity”, because the “opportunity” is greatly reduced by the specter of being caught on camera, in the commission of said crime.

    Bottom line: tagging makes the Richmond a more hospitable place for lowlife that I do not want in our midst. Tagging is the beginning of a slippery slope *downhill*, letting scum and lowlifes think that this is *their* territory. It’s NOT their territory, but our reluctance to take decisive actions that deter and apprehend criminals helps to put odds in the criminal’s favor.

Comments are closed.