Legislation on Graffiti

Prohibiting Graffiti: Restriction on a Right to Freedom of Expression ?

Graffiti is defined as, 'writing or drawings scribbled, scratched or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other surfaces in public spaces'. One pool of thought suggests that public places are, as the name suggests, owned by the public and thus everyone should have a right to express what they feel or believe in in public places. Graffiti enhances the aesthetic of a street, becomes an attraction for tourists and can be used to beautify even the most downtrodden of localities. It is a form of expression for the oppressed to express what they feel, a form of rebellion for which they must not be penalized and punished. If everyone has a right to say whatever they wish to, to a great extent, then why can one not draw and express what they wish to. On the contrary, another pool of thought says that Graffiti is a form of enforcing one's own views on everyone else. They claim that art is subjective, and no-one must be forced to view such art in public places, if they wish not to. While certain people view Graffiti as a method to increase the aesthetic of a locale, others view it as something which obliterates the beauty, and the natural appeal of a monument, or a general city landscape. Thus they construe that Graffiti is a method of oppressing someone by forcing their perspectives on others. They also highlight how Graffiti is a method for promoting illicit, immoral and unethical acts for gangs in certain localities, to promote the youth to follow a path which is not constructive and harmful for there futures. Lastly, the fact that 'Public Places' are maintained by a Taxpayer's money, is something which both pools of thought can interpret in different ways, to further their respective constructives. 

Please do drop a comment and let me know what you feel about the legalization of Graffiti.