Is it a crime to deface traffic signs?

That's amazing! So clever and doesn't cause any motorist to lose concentration even for one second. Of course not being Banksy, it has so little value................

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-885682-funny-road-signs-cletabraham-616422cf2ab63-700.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-649179-20220206-091245.jpg

Banksy is primarily a messenger - and tending towards anti-authoritarian. He does this through art.

So is this one! This, ironically, is a protest against unjust rules.

RosiesMaw

Whenever people start pontificating about “the law of the land” (as if there were any other sort, I just switch off.

As is your right! When laws are applied differently according to perceived "worthiness" I reserve my right to 'pontificate' if that's what you perceive fairness to be. I then make a judgement about posters I'd previously respected, as is my right.

The OP asks is it a crime to deface a traffic sign.
I don't agree that Banksy has defaced the sign.
Cut and paste all the links to legal waffle you like, it's all irrelevant.
Either you think he defaced the sign or not.

OldFrill

The OP asks is it a crime to deface a traffic sign.
I don't agree that Banksy has defaced the sign.
Cut and paste all the links to legal waffle you like, it's all irrelevant.
Either you think he defaced the sign or not.

Out of interest is there anything you would consider had 'defaced' the traffic sign? A personal tag? A political statement eg "Stop the boats" or "Refugees welcome"? "Happy Birthday Rob, 29 today"?

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-464846-eecef0d3-23c7-48b9-859b-e69206cf7071.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-742241-2574446b-9c0a-4d45-9d23-55235db9813c.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-922528-ed5676ba-50c1-4ba7-be8e-3d367341cf37.jpeg

No, Chestnut he is a pavement artist something altogether different, often not unconnected with begging for money.
Street art is visual art created in public locations for public visibility. It has been associated with the terms "independent art", "post-graffiti", "neo-graffiti" and “political art”.
Some of the most famous examples were on the Berlin Wall . It is an international art form, generally associated with protest. Or at least making a statement.

I wonder how much tolerance there would be for street art that opined a message that didn't accord with some poster's preferred views. Anti-semitism is raising its ugly head yet again (that doesn't imply support for either side in the present conflict) so would anti-semitism "street art" be acceptable as a political art form?

The one with the child and doll is particularly powerful and packs a strong message. But as it's not by Banksy, I suppose it's valueless monetarily. Maybe it's similar to the annual Turner Prize: I think that an unmade bed is simply that. Someone else considers it a work of art

RosiesMaw

Whenever people start pontificating about “the law of the land” (as if there were any other sort, I just switch off.

Tell that to the judge next time you're in court.

As per my previous responses l believe Banksy has enhanced this sign by £500,000 which l assume now belongs to whatever authority owns the sign. I think any attempt at prosecution due to the sign having been 'defaced' (as this is the term used in the OP) ludicrous. As I've also previously stated no other street artist can achieve a similar enhancement.

From my previous answers you can deduce my answer to this.

Does anyone else have trouble with quotes being included when responding?

Obviously, check my commemts

OldFrill

As per my previous responses l believe Banksy has enhanced this sign by £500,000 which l assume now belongs to whatever authority owns the sign. I think any attempt at prosecution due to the sign having been 'defaced' (as this is the term used in the OP) ludicrous. As I've also previously stated no other street artist can achieve a similar enhancement.

So because Banksy works command a high price you consider him above the law that pertains to ordinary mortals. Does that mean that should Banksy lose that prestigious status you'd then consider him subject to the same laws that pertain to other graffiti artists... fines etc?

This!

OldFrill

As per my previous responses l believe Banksy has enhanced this sign by £500,000 which l assume now belongs to whatever authority owns the sign. I think any attempt at prosecution due to the sign having been 'defaced' (as this is the term used in the OP) ludicrous. As I've also previously stated no other street artist can achieve a similar enhancement.

I've already explained that your opinion and your beliefs are not relevant to matters of law. Just as mine are not relevant. No matter how many times you tell us what you believe it won't change the law.

Then you have to consider the unthinkable.....what if this was a copy cat artist and not Banksy? In your opinion would it still be an enhancement if he was a nobody and had not actually increased its value? Or does it actually matter as long as people think it's done by Banksy?

It’s downright wrong - defacing road signs is distracting and dangerous and could cause accidents

Yes it is wrong, no matter who the ‘artist’. Dangerous precedents can be set by tolerating this.

The one with the child and doll is particularly powerful and packs a strong message. But as it's not by Banksy, I suppose it's valueless monetarily
Banksy is not the only talented or famous street artist in the world (even if he is the most famous). You may recognise Keith Haring who came to prominence in the 80’s. Or Jean Michel Basquiat whose graffiti art influenced artists in the genre such as BLU in Berlin.
And street art isn’t generally judged by its monetary value - because it is visible to all, its message is what makes the impact.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-289691-77ee3206-fbbd-484a-b800-253dee106737.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202312/medium-911948-7086f3d0-1863-4a5d-a998-a819d8cec49e.jpeg

Pics didn’t post- try again

Suspect there may be a bit of a metropolitan/non metropolitan split going on here. I live about ten minutes away from the scene of the "crime" (whatever you consider the crime to be) and love it.

They have now arrested someone for the theft of the enhanced stop sign and the council has installed a new regular sign. It has been joined by a duplicate of Banksy's sign installed by a local artist who says art is for everyone.

I hope Southwark Council, who surely are the legitimate owners, retrieve Banksy's sign and is able to sell it to boost much needed council funds.

I'm loving the narrative which I think will be ongoing. I'm curious about why Banksy chose this location - did he foresee the theft?

Awh but Banksy succeeded with his message, it certainly made people STOP and think if only for a moment...

Bridie22

Awh but Banksy succeeded with his message, it certainly made people STOP and think if only for a moment...

Very well said

Tens of thousands of people viewed Banksy's exhibition in Glasgow I was amongst them.It was very powerful and moving,many left in tears.I don,t think YOUR issue is the art its the message !If goverment's are working AGAINST peoples beliefs and Banksy is balancing it with his statement art all well and good in my view.Of course in a lot of minds on here I'm very left wing...I'm not but I think we need to see BOTH sides of the story of War and that doesn't always happen in plain sight