No, it's not just the railroads. Saw a box truck on in the Pennsylvania Poconos tonight, I-380 SB (MP 6 +/-) just before the junction with I-80 E-W, and it was just completely covered with what appeared to be graffiti-type images, swirls, etc. The only 'normal' lettering was on the side of the cab door, which indicated that it was from Brooklyn, NY . . .
- Paul North.
jimnorton I can't believe the hair splitting here. It does not matter who wrote the letter. What is important here is that the railroad wanted to give the impression that the response was great enough to convey the concern of the CEO. Whether that be personally or on his behalf. I am going to end it here but one of these responses was a hand written note.
I can't believe the hair splitting here. It does not matter who wrote the letter. What is important here is that the railroad wanted to give the impression that the response was great enough to convey the concern of the CEO. Whether that be personally or on his behalf.
I am going to end it here but one of these responses was a hand written note.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
BaltACD Do you suppose all those white-out marks on the concrete in the background are where graffiti has been covered over? I wonder what kind of return on investment that garnered for the city?
Jim Norton
Huntsville, AL
jimnorton
Murphy Siding Kyle I think that graffiti would go done if the RR police also take a look at sidings every once in awhile, maybe hit someone with a very harsh punishment and put them on the news. The presence of the police, and the demonstration of "this happens when you vandalize property" should make some vandals stop and think. Just wonder, what does it cost to paint an entire cost? Plus, what is the lost revenue? Maybe the RRs should make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught. It would take out of their spray can fund. This might be a viable option worth discussing, if you had any concept of how railroads, businesses in general, and the justice system works in our country. Railroads allocate funds to priorities. Graffiti is way down the list. A lot of the sidings are not on railroad property. They are on someone else's property. The railroads can't simply "make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught". There is this thing called laws and courts, and lawyers.
Kyle I think that graffiti would go done if the RR police also take a look at sidings every once in awhile, maybe hit someone with a very harsh punishment and put them on the news. The presence of the police, and the demonstration of "this happens when you vandalize property" should make some vandals stop and think. Just wonder, what does it cost to paint an entire cost? Plus, what is the lost revenue? Maybe the RRs should make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught. It would take out of their spray can fund.
I think that graffiti would go done if the RR police also take a look at sidings every once in awhile, maybe hit someone with a very harsh punishment and put them on the news. The presence of the police, and the demonstration of "this happens when you vandalize property" should make some vandals stop and think.
Just wonder, what does it cost to paint an entire cost? Plus, what is the lost revenue? Maybe the RRs should make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught. It would take out of their spray can fund.
If someone can sue a RR because they were stupid and went around the gates and got hit, then a RR suing someone for intentionally damaging RR property seems reasonable. It would only take a few vandals having to pay for lost revenue and cost of painting the car to send a strong message to other vandals and discourage a few. The local police department would mostly likely love it as well because it would discourage anyone who wants to graffiti anything. It won't stop graffiti, but it should lower the amount of tagging.
Not sure what is the point of posting this. Yes it does demonstrate graffiti is very ugly. There is some graffiti that looks like actual art, which is decent even though it is vandalism and should have been done. But just random "tags" are just an eyesore. Either way it is vandalism and should not be done (though I prefer artistic murals over tags).
Kyle Murphy Siding Kyle I think that graffiti would go done if the RR police also take a look at sidings every once in awhile, maybe hit someone with a very harsh punishment and put them on the news. The presence of the police, and the demonstration of "this happens when you vandalize property" should make some vandals stop and think. Just wonder, what does it cost to paint an entire cost? Plus, what is the lost revenue? Maybe the RRs should make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught. It would take out of their spray can fund. This might be a viable option worth discussing, if you had any concept of how railroads, businesses in general, and the justice system works in our country. Railroads allocate funds to priorities. Graffiti is way down the list. A lot of the sidings are not on railroad property. They are on someone else's property. The railroads can't simply "make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught". There is this thing called laws and courts, and lawyers. If someone can sue a RR because they were stupid and went around the gates and got hit, then a RR suing someone for intentionally damaging RR property seems reasonable. It would only take a few vandals having to pay for lost revenue and cost of painting the car to send a strong message to other vandals and discourage a few. The local police department would mostly likely love it as well because it would discourage anyone who wants to graffiti anything. It won't stop graffiti, but it should lower the amount of tagging.
Keep in mind that just because somebody won a civil lawsuit and was awarded a sizable amount of change does not mean that he's going to get it. Being awarded $500,000 doesn't mean anything if the defendants doesn't have any assets from which it could be paid.
jimnortonArthur "A.J." Farrar is a another passionate anti graffiti advocate that I have shared discussions with. In one of our last discussions, A.J. spoke of something some of you might know about. Apparently, cars with data and reflective stripes not visible (i.e. covered with graffiti) are currently in or will be in violation and must be remedied. Are we at the point where all cars in interchange service must have reflectrive striping? The reporting of cars in violation might be a catalyst in stepping up efforts to reduce graffiti.
In one of our last discussions, A.J. spoke of something some of you might know about. Apparently, cars with data and reflective stripes not visible (i.e. covered with graffiti) are currently in or will be in violation and must be remedied. Are we at the point where all cars in interchange service must have reflectrive striping?
The reporting of cars in violation might be a catalyst in stepping up efforts to reduce graffiti.
I once had a thread on railcar reflectors in which I raised the question of graffiti covering the reflectors and negating their effect. I would like to take a look at it, but as far as I can tell, we no longer have a search feature for this forum. The search engine here seems to only search Trains magazine.
In any case, my main point of the thread was to ask how the effect of dirty, missing, or painted-over reflectors would be reconciled with the mandate to display reflectors while in operation.
I can see the need to inspect and report the condtion of reflectors as being an essential routine before a train moves. Although perhaps the mandate allows for the operation with defective reflectors, and gives time to remedy that defect while continuing in operation.
Kyle If someone can sue a RR because they were stupid and went around the gates and got hit, then a RR suing someone for intentionally damaging RR property seems reasonable. It would only take a few vandals having to pay for lost revenue and cost of painting the car to send a strong message to other vandals and discourage a few.
If someone can sue a RR because they were stupid and went around the gates and got hit, then a RR suing someone for intentionally damaging RR property seems reasonable. It would only take a few vandals having to pay for lost revenue and cost of painting the car to send a strong message to other vandals and discourage a few.
I dunno about that "strong message," Kyle. How would it get out? I don't see these taggers as newspaper subscribers or close students of the "Cops and Courts" beat.
Here is page 3 of a comprehensive report on understanding the graffiti problem. This page 3 is a highly detailed analysis on methods for policing graffiti. You can go back to page1 and 2 for more analysis on the graffiti breakdown of types, motives, etc.
http://www.popcenter.org/problems/graffiti/3
jimnorton I
Perfect example of how railroad are combating graffiti. Put the numbers higher so nothing gets covered. The graffiti can run along the bottom and the ID stays safe
So....They're combating Graffiti by ensuring it's harder for the inevitable graffiti to obscure important information...
That doesn't sound like the kind of solution that the OP was thinking of.
YoHo1975 So....They're combating Graffiti by ensuring it's harder for the inevitable graffiti to obscure important information... That doesn't sound like the kind of solution that the OP was thinking of.
Bummer for him!
Here is the thread that I referred to on the previous page that addresses the matter of railcar side reflectors being obscured by graffiti. Perhaps someone can find the current regulations on keeping reflectors clean and unobscured by paint or snow.
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/69076.aspx
As I recall, the regulations requiring railcar side reflectors specify where they are to be located on the car; and it is rather low where it would be right in the graffiti zone. I wonder it taggers conscientiously avoid painting over the reflectors.
EuclidI wonder it taggers conscientiously avoid painting over the reflectors.
Given that they are often known to avoid other important information on the cars, they probably do leave the reflective material alone.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
I have seen references to taggers leaving car lettering unpainted as a sign of respect to the railroaders who need to see those numbers and specifications. That seems to correspond to the often cited assertions that many taggers have a grudge against the car owners and corporate structure, but are sympathetic to the working man.
Another reason cited for taggers not painting over the specifications is that it reduces the impetus for the railroad to paint over the graffiti in the process of restoring the specifications. I would think that model of behavior might apply mostly the taggers who expend a lot of effort doing impressive work that they want the world to see. So they are interested in preserving their work for as much exposure that it can get.
But there are several different tagger profiles. Other profiles are not as sympathetic to preserving rail car specifications or motivated to preserve their work. To cover those profiles, raising the specifications to a location above the tagging zone could be helpful. That suggests also raising the reflectors, but I am not sure if that would be acceptable. Reflectors need to be located at an elevation that is most likely to be seen by drivers.
Taggers that do preserve the specifications and lettering might preserve the reflectors for the same reason if they understand the point and significance of the reflectors. That may not be as obvious as it is with the specifications and lettering.
Despite taking care to avoid covering the essential markings on the cars, these people show that they do not respect the property of other people. If they want the world to see their work, why do they not attempt to have a showing in an art gallery of some sort? What leads them to steal (they are not invited to use the sides of cars) the use of other people's property?
Johnny
I think some of them feel like they are getting even with people who own the property. A lot of people hate the rich because they feel like people being rich is the reason why they are not rich. Some of them are anarchists. They often paint messages about these revolutionary impulses.
Another big part of the motivation is the fact that trains carry their art as a traveling exhibition to be seen by people all over the country. Galleries could serve the same purpose, but it is hard to get your work into galleries.
A lot of these artistic taggers are motivated by ego and fame more than by money. So they work for free. Nobody will pay them for their art if is it on the side of a boxcar. I suppose when you work for free, it is easy to rationalize that your canvas should also be free.
"Graffiti" "taggers" etc. seem to be euphemisms. The persons responsible are often members of criminal gangs. Painting on a movable billboard (railroad car side) provides free publicity for them in many other cities.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Search for:
49 CFR 224 - REFLECTORIZATION OF RAIL FREIGHT ROLLING STOCK
3.5 Sq ft of yellow reflective tape about 42" ATR. Dirt , grime, dust, snow and ice are not counted as far as being obscured.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Murphy Siding Kyle Murphy Siding Kyle I think that graffiti would go done if the RR police also take a look at sidings every once in awhile, maybe hit someone with a very harsh punishment and put them on the news. The presence of the police, and the demonstration of "this happens when you vandalize property" should make some vandals stop and think. Just wonder, what does it cost to paint an entire cost? Plus, what is the lost revenue? Maybe the RRs should make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught. It would take out of their spray can fund. This might be a viable option worth discussing, if you had any concept of how railroads, businesses in general, and the justice system works in our country. Railroads allocate funds to priorities. Graffiti is way down the list. A lot of the sidings are not on railroad property. They are on someone else's property. The railroads can't simply "make the vandals pay these prices when they are caught". There is this thing called laws and courts, and lawyers. If someone can sue a RR because they were stupid and went around the gates and got hit, then a RR suing someone for intentionally damaging RR property seems reasonable. It would only take a few vandals having to pay for lost revenue and cost of painting the car to send a strong message to other vandals and discourage a few. The local police department would mostly likely love it as well because it would discourage anyone who wants to graffiti anything. It won't stop graffiti, but it should lower the amount of tagging. You can sue anyone for anything. Now you're talking about suing the wealthy vandals for damages? Does a couple hundred thousand dollars in legal expenses to get a judgement from a vandal sound like a good investment to you? What police department wouldn't love to pull officers off other duties to play hide and go seek with vandals, with the payoff of having your officers tied up in court proceedings for years? I think your plan is still really short on reality.
I didn't suggest that police departments have officers try to catch vandals. What I was saying is that a police department would support RR police arresting vandals and suing wealthier ones (or at least the children of wealthy people). The police department wouldn't have to put in any man power (unless maybe a lawyer for the RR) and would have the message that "if you vandalise property, then you will have to pay for the reair, even of it is almost every thing you have". Then some vandals (who also damage personal property that the police department is responsible for) might think and stop. That would make the police departments job easier, and make the town look better.
Euclid I have seen references to taggers leaving car lettering unpainted as a sign of respect to the railroaders who need to see those numbers and specifications. That seems to correspond to the often cited assertions that many taggers have a grudge against the car owners and corporate structure, but are sympathetic to the working man. Another reason cited for taggers not painting over the specifications is that it reduces the impetus for the railroad to paint over the graffiti in the process of restoring the specifications. I would think that model of behavior might apply mostly the taggers who expend a lot of effort doing impressive work that they want the world to see. So they are interested in preserving their work for as much exposure that it can get. But there are several different tagger profiles. Other profiles are not as sympathetic to preserving rail car specifications or motivated to preserve their work. To cover those profiles, raising the specifications to a location above the tagging zone could be helpful. That suggests also raising the reflectors, but I am not sure if that would be acceptable. Reflectors need to be located at an elevation that is most likely to be seen by drivers. Taggers that do preserve the specifications and lettering might preserve the reflectors for the same reason if they understand the point and significance of the reflectors. That may not be as obvious as it is with the specifications and lettering.
I would think that if you raise all the data, it would be harder on railroaders who would haw to look up at a high angle to see the data. Having to do this a lot would probably make their necks sore. So the RRs would jut be punishing their own employees.
I think The Rambler of martini glass fame was a car knocker in Beaumont, TX
But, he did most of his work in chalk, or maybe crayon.
Kyle I didn't suggest that police departments have officers try to catch vandals. What I was saying is that a police department would support RR police arresting vandals and suing wealthier ones (or at least the children of wealthy people). The police department wouldn't have to put in any man power (unless maybe a lawyer for the RR) and would have the message that "if you vandalise property, then you will have to pay for the reair, even of it is almost every thing you have". Then some vandals (who also damage personal property that the police department is responsible for) might think and stop. That would make the police departments job easier, and make the town look better.
schlimm "Graffiti" "taggers" etc. seem to be euphemisms. The persons responsible are often members of criminal gangs. Painting on a movable billboard (railroad car side) provides free publicity for them in many other cities.
Bingo!
And even among the taggers who are not gang-related, the idea is to have your handiwork seen. "I was here."
While there are those who tag for the sake of tagging (and perhaps "putting it to the man" in the process), I'd opine that the vast majority (especially those with detailed entries) want their work seen, and will endeavor to do what is necessary to ensure that their mark stays visible for as long as possible.
I'm sort of surprised that I haven't seen any cars with the reporting marks, etc, "framed" instead of just painted around...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.