KCRag Forum

LenexatoKCMO wrote: Obviously the city has a lot larger and more complicated area to cover but the whole "we have bigger fish to fry" attitude does little to reassure folks.  If you want people to feel safe, you have to take this 'petty' stuff seriously. 

Unfortanantly, this attitude is the same attitude our nation's leader has. Taking money from local law enforcement and placing it into homeland security, preventing against an attack that will likely happen if he keeps up his great forign relations.

dangerboy wrote: FYI, 911 is for life or death emergencies, not reporting something like this. 

The non-emergency number is virtually impossible to find.   You look in the phoen book and the only number listed without a deep, exhaustive search is 911.    They obviously want people to use it.   So use it and let the dispatchers sort out what priority each call should get.

KCMax wrote: If you want people to feel safe, you have to take this 'petty' stuff seriously. 

The urban renewal book I read last year "Comeback Cities" talked about how Boston and New York began cracking down on the "petty" stuff like vandalism, graffiti, jumping subway fare, and noticed a considerably decline in overall crime.

...and the book "Freakonomics" disputes any causal relationship between the two, citing another rather striking reasoning that I won't go into here at the risk of a flamewar.

Who knows what works -- but doubtlessly, an appearance of permissiveness sends the wrong message.

I think I know what you're talking about, Bill Bennett

KCMax wrote: The urban renewal book I read last year "Comeback Cities" talked about how Boston and New York began cracking down on the "petty" stuff like vandalism, graffiti, jumping subway fare, and noticed a considerably decline in overall crime.

Interesting. Perhaps it would change my mind, I dunno. Been meaning to pick it up, myself. Either way, I'd rather see someone tagging than robbing me. Given the many unpleasant alternatives that bored kids often resort to, I'll take the graffiti over most. And this business of putting taggers in the same boat as more serious vandals doesn't seem very reasonable. They're not destroying any property, and even "damaging" strikes me as a little bit of a stretch. The property is still fully intact and perfectly useable, unlike a slashed tire or broken window.

Which isn't to say it isn't a problem. Obviously someone has to spend money to clean it up, and however you look at it they're breaking the law. I guess my real issue is with calling 911. Tagging just doesn't strike me as warranting that kind of response, and personally I'm not going to go there. But, as always, I encourage everyone to do as they like.

Staubio: lemme guess: gentrification?

mean wrote: Staubio: lemme guess: gentrification?

Far more contentious than that, but it does end in "tion."

mean wrote: I'd rather see someone tagging than robbing me.

But it isn't an either or option.  Why can't we expect that neither will happen?

mean wrote: And this business of putting taggers in the same boat as more serious vandals doesn't seem very reasonable. They're not destroying any property, and even "damaging" strikes me as a little bit of a stretch. The property is still fully intact and perfectly useable, unlike a slashed tire or broken window.

You may feel that it is not as serious, but talk to the person whose property has been "tagged" and see what they say.  Property damage is property damage, whether it is purely cosmetic or not.

I think we should demand the best, not accept the worst.  I know graffiti will never completely stop, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop it.

Here is the paper that sparked the debate, and sparked the firestorm Bill Bennett comment that KCMax mentioned.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=174508

lock&load wrote: But it isn't an either or option.  Why can't we expect that neither will happen?

For me its not even an expectation that neither will happen - to a certain extent that is even beyond the direct control of the police.  To me it is more of an expectation that the police will take any report of a crime seriously, that they will show up in a timely manner, and that they will actually take positive action in response to it.  To me, when a police department starts heading down the road where there is a crime threshold at which point it becomes appropriate to call 911 and appropriate for the police to respond - you have a problem.  i.e - use 911 for assualt and we will come out - but if someone just smashes your shit - call this hotline and fill out a voice mail report which we will promptly deep file.  It sends the total wrong message.  If you don't have the dispatcher and officer resources to field and respond to a call of suspicious and/or criminal activity than its time to start talking about getting more resources.  

staubio wrote: Here is the paper that sparked the debate, and sparked the firestorm Bill Bennett comment that KCMax mentioned.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=174508

Preemptive law enforcement. ........ 

"You! You look like you're probably in a gang! You're under arrest!"

LenexatoKCMO wrote: i.e - use 911 for assualt and we will come out - but if someone just smashes your shit - call this hotline and fill out a voice mail report which we will promptly deep file.  It sends the total wrong message. 

This is completely untrue.  Where'd you get the idea that KCPD ignores non-911 calls?  They DO respond, but maybe within an hour instead of 5 minutes.

I've had to call the police twice in the last year.  Once for a home burglarly and once for a car accident.  Neither was life or death, so I called 411 and had them connect me to the non-emergency number.  An officer should up within 20 minutes both times.

LenexatoKCMO wrote: For me its not even an expectation that neither will happen - to a certain extent that is even beyond the direct control of the police.  To me it is more of an expectation that the police will take any report of a crime seriously, that they will show up in a timely manner, and that they will actually take positive action in response to it.  To me, when a police department starts heading down the road where there is a crime threshold at which point it becomes appropriate to call 911 and appropriate for the police to respond - you have a problem.  i.e - use 911 for assualt and we will come out - but if someone just smashes your shit - call this hotline and fill out a voice mail report which we will promptly deep file.  It sends the total wrong message.  If you don't have the dispatcher and officer resources to field and respond to a call of suspicious and/or criminal activity than its time to start talking about getting more resources.  

Well, I guess we won't know whether they would have taken this request seriously or not seeing as NO ONE CALLED.  But, to be fair to Justin seeing as he was leaving a Westport bar at 1:30 am he might not have been in the best place to be using a cell phone and driving at the same time.  Hell, perhaps he was SOOO wasted that he didn't really see it at all.  Perhaps, it was a homeless person peeing on the sidewalk and he was mistaken.  Did we have a few too many Cuervo shots celebrating our new year, Justin?

dangerboy wrote: This is completely untrue.  Where'd you get the idea that KCPD ignores non-911 calls?  They DO respond, but maybe within an hour instead of 5 minutes.

I've had to call the police twice in the last year.  Once for a home burglarly and once for a car accident.  Neither was life or death, so I called 411 and had them connect me to the non-emergency number.  An officer should up within 20 minutes both times.

Sorry for any confusion - my example was intended as an illustration of the slippery slope many police departments seem headed on - not an example of an actual experience with the KCPD.  I have not had any need to deal with the KCMO police since moving there.  However, I have had this experierience with the lawrence PD - a particularly lassiez-faire bunch if you ask me.  As BFA points out the entire discussion is rather hypothetical since we have no idea how the PD would have responded if he had called.  Hell, maybe they would have sent out several cars looking for the perp.  I just don't like the idea of there being a thershold for just when you should and shouldn't expect a response from the PD; the idea that some crime might be beneath their efforts. 

justin8216 wrote: Last night I was leaving the bar and driving through westport, and watched a guy spray painting a stone wall across from the post office with a gang symbol. It was only 1:30 AM. I thought about calling 911 on my cell phone and reporting him as he was walking all over Westport spraying gang symbols. However I didn't. I figured it would just be a waste of time, as it would be put at the bottom of the police priority list. I saw tons of police cruisers going up and down Main Street, but not one ever turned down a side street. The graffiti is getting really bad in Midtown/Westport. Why isn't KCMO or the westport property owners doing anything about this?

Justin, could you be more specific as to the location of the stone wall? Also, I'm confused about one thing in your post, did you watch him spray at several locations in Westport? You're probably right to assume he was leaving his tag everywhere but I was curious if you followed him for a while. If this person was just spraying a small tag, then he wasn't there for very long. These guys move pretty quick. The exception and the reason I ask is that there is a crew called the Mayhem crew that is real active right now. They are the ones who leave the 5 ft wide by 4 ft tall "EYE" and "NWA" burners on walls. These guys are real assholes (that is my opinion) and pride themselves on nailing the prime visual locations. There's one right next to the post office (by Marios), they just nailed a 90 year old stone wall in the Crossroads and I even saw one on the construction trailer at the Federal Reserve site.

It's the really large tags / burners / whatever that costs business owners a lot of money to get rid of. The Crossroads Community Association has a great program to deal with 'bad' graffiti. Here's a link to their website and the anti-graffiti initiative.

http://www.crossroadscommunityassociati ... Letter.pdf

As far as I know Westport doesn't have anything similar but I could be wrong. I haven't been a member of the Wesport Merchants Association for a long time.

In my opinion there is a huge difference between good grafitti artists like Scribe and Gear who paint on permission walls and are decent people who respect a business owners property and guys like the Mayhem crew who are just getting their name out.... wherever they want.

I'm guessing that the cops are well aware of these dudes and would love to catch them in the act. Make the call!

if you email your councilman or woman and ask the aid for the email address to complain about a building that has graffiti on it. Then you can email them and tell them the address of the graffiti  building. They'll send a letter to the graffiti building to get the graffiti off of their building because it is against the ordinance to have graffiti on your building.
I forgot the email address but it worked for me in our neighborhood.

^
yes, punish the victim.  that is a fan-fucking-tanstic policy!

as spotster pointed out we have a serious graffiti problem in northeast.  i'm not talking about cute little tags and throw-ups, i'm talking about the shit-smear "east side lokotes" tags everywhere on st. john and environs.  i shudder to think that if some 13-year-old poser tags my house i could be punished by the city because the police department failed to do its job.

if you drag him inside your house you can shoot him.

Paintfumes wrote: if you drag him inside your house you can shoot him.

Can we do that to you too?  Really, maybe it was you out tagging.  You have clearly sniffed a few too many paint fumes.  Or should I say paints fume?

only if you see a graffiti writing that says " lock and load" on a building.