What's really needed in the graffiti war
The City of Portland's new ordinance requiring that retailers lock up spray paint and record the identification of everyone buying it is a laughable way to fight graffiti. In years past, wiser city leaders grasped well the only real way to combat this urban blight: get everyone in town cleaning it up as soon as it appears. When taggers see their handiwork disappear faster than they can come back and admire it, they quickly find a new place to vandalize. After bouncing around without success, they might decide to take up a more productive habit, like narcotics.
Anyway, if the city really wants to fight graffiti, that's where it needs to focus its efforts -- mobilizing property owners and neighbors to get right on removing tags while the paint's still wet. The city has a crew that runs around cleaning up traffic signs, and a central coordinator who takes in reports and photos of some of the more egregious violations, but together they're spit in the ocean. Average Janes and Joes with cleaning fluid, solvent, buckets, and coverup paints -- they're the only hope of staying ahead of the epidemic. Otherwise, Portland goes the route of San Francisco and New York -- amateur visual garbage on every outdoor surface.
Unfortunately, from my recent unscientific cruises through the inner east side of the Rose City, I can see that the cleanup volunteers are getting tired. Several of the hot spots aren't get cleared of the vandals' work as quickly as they used to. A few property and business owners appear to have given up altogether. The Asian restaurant on the northwest corner of NE 9th and Broadway is a perfect example. The north-facing wall in the rear of that establishment has now been abandoned to the taggers, and of course the graffiti is starting to spread to other nearby walls. There's a similar story going down on 8th. It's a shame.
Now, the city has an ordinance that requires owners to clean up tags on their property within a few days of their being posted, and so there's the stick that theoretically gets the victim to remedy the crime. But how about a carrot or two? What is the city doing to reach out to the public, and help and encourage them with the awful cleanup chores?
What's happened to law enforcement? Do they do anything (other than contemplate their pensions) between 2 and 5 most mornings, when all the tagging seems to get done? It doesn't take a genius to figure out which locations are the taggers' favorites. Would it kill the Police Bureau to invest a little personpower in these locations at the appropriate hours to nab, say, a tagger a month? In these parts, they tend to be a bunch of little snitches, and so a bust or two might actually yield a good handful of spray paint cockroaches in a short time.
And what about security cams at a few of the hot spots? These devices seem to work well when they're writing out huge robo-tickets for running a red light. Put a few at SE 20th and Stark, SE 7th and Schuyler, the I-5 underpasses between the Marquam and the Rose Quarter, and move them around. If they're not too obvious, they'll record lots of tagger sickos in action. What could that cost -- a few thousand?
To ask the city's property owners to deal with graffiti week after week, the city needs to bring something of benefit to the table. It needs to show as much tenacity and stamina in promoting graffiti cleanup as it's asking the neighbors to demonstrate in the never-ending battle. Right now, the city's falling down on the job, and the neighbors are next. For the City Council to bust people's chops when they buy and sell paint is not the answer.
Comments (58)
The politicians KNOW that the new ordinance imposes a terrible burden and is not at all going to be effective in diminishing grafitti.
The ordinance is a public-relations measure for the politicians and a slight revenue raising measure as well as a way to use selective enforcement against small businesses. It is NOT designed to diminish the grafitti problem. Everyone knows that.
Posted by FoolsGold | September 4, 2007 7:54 AM
How about enforcing the ordinance that requires that it be cleaned up, but have it done by work crews of people who are doing community service as a sentence for some sort of lawbreaking. It seems like a great solution; the victims, with one phone call, get the mess cleaned up, and the community service programs get to serve.
If the victims refuse to avail themselves of the service, and refuse to clean it themselves, fine them. Have the fine increase daily until they comply. If they don't pay the fine, then no business license renewal until it is paid.
Problem solved. See how easy that was? But then again, I don't work for government, so I'm allowed to use my brain and be creative.
Posted by al | September 4, 2007 8:01 AM
Dear Jack,
Thank you!
I hope you can send this to the members of the City Council this am as well.
As a small business owner who happens to currently sell spray paint, all of what you have written makes perfect sense to me.
We too are the vitim of graffiti on an almost weekly basis. We clean up or paint over this stuff all the time. Some sort of help, or even recognition of the clean up efforts, from the city would be welcome any time to every business owner.
What happened to having the convicted taggers work to clean up the taggs?
Let's all work to catch and punish the taggers, not the general public.
Anne Kilkenny
WC Winks' Hardware
Posted by Anne Kilkenny | September 4, 2007 8:02 AM
Quite a few years back a friend of mine's son was busted for grafitti. He was just a couple weeks past his eighteenth birthday. His father asked that his community service time (200 hrs, as I recall) be dedicated to graffiti clean up, but at that time there was no vehicle for community service time to be spent on any particular task. That was true even if the judge ordered it. His kid spent most of his time cutting weeds and planting flowers.
Posted by Dave Lister | September 4, 2007 8:21 AM
I recall that a young woman who was attending Reed College, who was convicted for graffiti a few years ago had to do clean up and appologise to the vicitms for her crime.
Am I remembering correctly?
Posted by Anne Kilkenny | September 4, 2007 8:28 AM
Anne,
That gal from Reed College was actually on the same comm service crew as my friend's son. She did apologize to the victims, but she was pulling weeds with all the other kids. As I recall, my friend's son never did a single day of graffiti clean up.
Posted by Dave Lister | September 4, 2007 8:41 AM
Gee, that's too bad. I think that pulling weeds may be a bit easier than graffiti removal. I have done both and personally I find the later a good deal more difficult than the former. But then I am a long way for 20 years old these days.
I really hope that we can get the council to wake up and realize that this latest "effort" is not going to to anything except force the taggers beyond the city limits to buy the paint and it will do virtually nothing to stop this vandalism. It may even increase as they tag the trains to and from the Home Depots and Wal-Marts that ring the city.
I also think that security cameras would help to decrease tagging and catch the taggers. They seem to help in wealthier areas of the city, like the Pearl, where they are used by the property and business owners.
Posted by Anne Kilkenny | September 4, 2007 9:06 AM
The taggers have already moved on to other forms of graffiti.
If you go to the MAX platform at the Hollywood, you'll see some sort of paint drizzled all over the platform.
What's your next move Mr. Leonard?
Posted by Garage Wine | September 4, 2007 9:08 AM
Graffiti in Portland, contrary to comments you have made in other posts on this subject, has reached epidemic levels in some parts of Portland (especially lower income areas of outer east Portland).
We have two full time crews that remove and/or cover graffiti all over Portland. We have stings that has caught vandals in the act. Still, the amount of paint spraying of peoples homes, cars and fences along with businesses who not only get "tagged" with traditional spray paint but also often includes acid in the paint that etches the painted area permanently into their window, continues to increase dramatically, according to the stats (and my own observation riding the bus in daily from Lents) kept by the Portland Police Bureau.
Contrary to what you and others have said, I did meet with store owners that sell spray paint over the past weeks including the commenter on this site and the author of the anonymours email you posted on your last post on this subject.
I reminded each of them that the city had a voluntary program since 1998 that encouraged spray paint sellers to store their spray paint in an area secure from being stolen. The hardware store owners have completely ignored the city's repeated requests for the sellers of spray paint to responsibly store the paint in an area that reduces the chance of it being stolen.
Interestingly, the location of the last meeting place, where I met with a number of hardware store owners (including Winks' Hardware), Division Street Hardware, had the spray paint stored right next to and facing the front entrance. A location, I reminded all of the hardware store owners present, that was perfect for a person walking along the sidewalk viewing the spray paint through the large window that need then only open the door, take one step inside, grab the paint and begin tagging peoples cars, homes and businesses. I pointed out to those present that the voluntary program was an abject failure, best represented by where the spray paint was being displayed right where they chose for me to meet them.
One business owner in this meeting volunteered that they all knew the kind of paint that was used almost exclusively for vandalism. He identified the black spray paint that sells for 99 cents a can and is characterized by "running" when used. I immediately remembered hundreds of tags I have seen that were exactly that. He suggested they could just quit selling that kind of paint and all by itself, that would reduce a lot of the graffiti in Portland.
I thought, of course, why didn't these "responsible" retailers do that one, two or three years ago? But then I knew why....because they sell a lot of it and they make a lot of money selling it.
Sorry, Jack. These owners -whose cause you have taken up- have had more than ample opportunity to work with the city and they could not have been clearer about their intent to cooperate than the stocking of spray paint by the front door of Division Street Hardware.
You may think this effort is stupid, but I am pretty sure if a newspapers stand chained to a telephone pole next to your favorite restaurant on NE 24th and Fremont sparked your ire, walking out of your house and seeing every car, fence and house on your street (including your own) tagged with obscene images, words and indecipherable symbols would have motivated you to post a series of pieces the city for not doing what other city's have done to reduce this kind of vandalism.
And, more to the point, what other city's have done successfully is to regulate the sale and storage of spray paint in stores that sell spray paint. In fact, Portland's ordinance is based on similar ordinances in city's around the US from California to New York. This approach has proven effective in every city that has implemented this strategy. And the costs to businesses can be virtually non existent. They need only keep the spray paint in a location that is inaccessible to the public. That means behind the counter, in the store room or any other place the public is not allowed to be. If someone wants a can of paint, they can get a slip of paper and fill it out themselves including the paint they want (much like buying a watch at Costco). The store owner need only keep that piece of paper to comply with the ordinance (a point I have repeatedly told the spray paint sellers...in spite of what they write here).
I have never said this approach will stop spray paint graffiti. However, the Police Officer in charge of graffiti abatement in Portland testified he has no chance to turn the corner on the graffiti epidemic that is hitting parts of Portland without this ordinance as one of the tools he can use to give him a leg up on the unlimited supply of cheap, easily purchased spray paint.
My reality is that I talk with home owners and businesses all over Portland who are repeatedly tagged within days of removing obscene vandalism from their homes, fences cars and businesses. They remove the graffiti one day, and it is up soon after. Some are so angry, they promise violence if they catch the vandals themselves
We currently do stings and follow up investigations. Still, the problem grows. The spray paint retailers have made it clear they are part of the problem, not interested in being part of the solution. That leaves me in a position to put my head in the sand and pretend, along with you and your commenter's, that everything is hunky-dory and lets not be overly burdensome on the small businesses that sell this stuff.
Sorry, I don't live there anymore.
Posted by Randy Leonard | September 4, 2007 9:22 AM
Randy,
I would still like to know why you did not work with the Small Business Advisory Council on this ordinance. That's what the council is for.
You also tried to do an end run around the SBAC on "time, place and manner", but they caught on.
On the surface, it seems that you will engage the Small Business Council if you want their support, but you will ignore them if you want to promote a policy that you know will meet with resistance.
My term of service on the SBAC ended before your bio-fuels initiative. Did you even bother to take that one to them?
Posted by Dave Lister | September 4, 2007 9:31 AM
New York had a similar problem with graffiti when David Dinkins and his friends ran the place.
Posted by David E Gilmore | September 4, 2007 9:51 AM
Thank you Dave Lister...
You said it all.
I will not even dignify Mr. Leonard's reply witrh a response since he only last week simply refused to even consider alternatives proposed by the SBAC and the small family owned hardware stores involved in these discussions.
As of November Winks' Hardware will no longer stock spray paint. It is simply too much of a hassle, as well as an invasive inconvenience to our customers. We will continue to provide the best customer service we can to our patrons, including Mr. Leonard, should he wish to visit our store.
Posted by Anne Kilkenny | September 4, 2007 10:57 AM
Contrary to what you and others have said, I did meet with store owners that sell spray paint over the past weeks
I never said anything to the contrary.
walking out of your house and seeing every car, fence and house on your street (including your own) tagged with obscene images, words and indecipherable symbols would have motivated you to post a series of pieces the city for not doing what other city's have done to reduce this kind of vandalism.
Perhaps. But I wouldn't start blaming the hardware stores.
I've been blogging about graffiti for years. The city has a pretty good program. But I know b.s. when I smell it.
They need only keep the spray paint in a location that is inaccessible to the public. That means behind the counter, in the store room or any other place the public is not allowed to be.
And that real estate is free?
If someone wants a can of paint, they can get a slip of paper and fill it out themselves including the paint they want (much like buying a watch at Costco). The store owner need only keep that piece of paper to comply with the ordinance (a point I have repeatedly told the spray paint sellers...in spite of what they write here).
And no one checks anyone's ID?
The Police Officer in charge of graffiti abatement in Portland testified he has no chance to turn the corner on the graffiti epidemic that is hitting parts of Portland without this ordinance
That's pitiful.
Some are so angry, they promise violence if they catch the vandals themselves
That's nice. But entirely beside the point.
Sorry, I don't live there anymore.
You sure don't. Give my love to Opie. You're getting dippier than he is lately.
Any time you're ready, you can address the main point made by the post, which is that the city's not doing enough.
Posted by Jack Bog | September 4, 2007 11:30 AM
Is it a fair interpretation that, in the world Leonard lives in, the hardware store owners are at least partly at fault for tagging for selling the paint that taggers prefer and have reaped windfall profits from it, and so it's therefore right and proper that they bear the brunt of his remedial measures? Is that what he's saying?
Posted by Zeb Quinn | September 4, 2007 12:27 PM
"We currently do stings and follow up investigations. Still, the problem grows"
Randy are you nuts?
No really, ARE YOU NUTS?
Not one word about,Oh, say crime and "punishment"?
Do these vandals get jail time or not. If not why not? And why haven't you checked and voiced this highly important component as well as your respsonse to it?
Posted by Karen | September 4, 2007 12:27 PM
I don't think polling the readers of this site will adequately rebut Randy's rebuttal, Jack. It's pretty solid, wouldn't you say?
Posted by Matt Davis | September 4, 2007 12:42 PM
Let's call this lipstick wearing pig what it really is....
POLITICS!
From ethanol, to duct tape, to locking up spray paint Randy Leonard is in full on, grab as much press as he can, re-election mode.
These guys don't give a lusty fart for what's good for the community. All they care about is keeping their jobs and keeping their power. They sleep behind their desks for about three years, then, when it's time to think about being on a ballot again, they start pulling any kind of a cockamamie ordinance out of their bodily orfices to get their name in the papers.
The voters, in their ignorance, recognize the name, because there's been so much press, and they fill in the box.
Life's pretty good when you have a fire pension, a ninety plus K position as a city commissioner and, down the road, a PERS pension.
Old Randy might have more regard for folks like Jane Kilkenney if he had, at any time in his life, received a paycheck that wasn't paid for by the taxpayers. Or signed a paycheck, better still.
But he never has, so he just doesn't get it.
It's good to be the king.
Posted by anon | September 4, 2007 12:53 PM
Just of the record...
Mr. Leonard states that there has been a "voluntary program since 1998". Well this was the first we have heard of it. I can state that to the best of my knowledge we have never recieved any communication from the city about any program voluntary or otherwise, for graffiti abatement, mentioning anything regarding the locking up or storing spray paint. If missed that, I appologise.
I can say that at Winks' we do have security cameras and other means to try and stop all shoplifing, as well as protecting our customers and patrons.
The batch numbers of spray paint represent over 213,000 cans of paint for each batch!
If the city really wants to administer a program for graffiti abatement, why can't the city issue licenses for the buyers of spray paint. One goes to city hall, has a background check and is issued a license to buy paint. The retailer could sell paint only to those persons with a license, similar to requiring ID for liquor, or certain chemicals like refrigerants.
The responsibility is for the city to enforce the laws to punish the perpetrators, not the citizens.
Get real Mr. Leonard. How are the police officers supposed to track down one person using one can of paint from a batch of more than 213,000?
The basic behavior has to be changed. The taggers have to learn that their actions have serious consequences, i.e. jail time!
Until that happens graffiti will continue no matter where or how the paint is sold.
Posted by Anne Kilkenny | September 4, 2007 1:25 PM
I live in SE Portland close in. I am so sick and tired of seeing brand new signs defaced over night with scribbles from spray painting wackos. It really make the neighborhood look tacky and costs the City a lot of money (your tax dollars) to replace those signs. (Traffic control signs cannot be cleaned!)
Maybe we should adopt stricter laws such as cutting off the hand that uses the spray paint if caught!
Posted by Steve | September 4, 2007 2:22 PM
Spraycans don't make graffiti tags; taggers make graffiti tags.
Posted by Obwaldo | September 4, 2007 2:35 PM
With the spray-paint locked away, my wife and I discovered a new kind of tagging in front of our Southeast Portland house last week.
Some "young creative" drizzled oil-based enamel paint on our sidewalk in the form of some kind of initial-based logo.
It took us an hour to scrub it off of the sidewalk (probably a lot more time than it took them to violate it).
Posted by stephen | September 4, 2007 3:03 PM
Are permanent markers next? I see more gang tags on mailboxes and bus stops made with permanent markers than with spray paint...
If you outlaw Sharpies, only outlaws will have Sharpies!
Posted by Jon | September 4, 2007 3:09 PM
Maybe we should adopt stricter laws such as cutting off the hand that uses the spray paint if caught!
C'mon now...thats fodder for that "fascist government" we supposedly already have!
Posted by Jon | September 4, 2007 3:10 PM
I can tell those who have never had their property "tagged".
Strange how perceptions change with experience.
Until and unless there are sufficient funds allocated for actual legal enforcement, with "time" allocated to offenders to clean up graffito, any ordinance to restrain it will be useless. As I've already pointed out, "slaptags" are already appearing in my southeast Portland neighborhood. Many of the newer "tags" are not spraycan, but permanent mega-point pens.
They gonna lock up all the pens, too?
Public enforcers not doing enough? Tough ship....you got your tax break, shut up and enjoy it.
If you want police to assign their resources, including enforcement cameras, then YOU come up with the money to pay for the tools, supplies and officers to run it.
Posted by godfry | September 4, 2007 3:17 PM
ok, so I want to tag a building with my famous signature line. I go to Lowe's and buy 2 can of my favorite paint. the POS lady want's my ID. should i give her my real one or the one i use to buy my beer?
ok lady, here's my beer ID card. woo hoo i got my paint.
wait, i messed up, i gave her my REAL id.
so i tag the buildings anyway late one night and don't get caught. how are the police gonna catch me? run chemical analysis on the paint? find the brand/batch number, cross ref to the store, investigate all customers who purchased same brand of paint?
are they really gonna spend all this time and effort to TRY and catch me?
Posted by tagger | September 4, 2007 3:43 PM
What's going to keep taggers from asking someone else to buy their paint for them, Randy?
Posted by Chris McMullen | September 4, 2007 4:16 PM
I still think it's really easy to go outside of Portland to get spray paint and then tag wherever presents the "best available canvas".
Posted by Kevin | September 4, 2007 4:36 PM
The Krylon® Products Group has a comprehensive list of effective anti-graffiti practices listed on their Graffiti Hurts® website:
Form a Task Force
Educate
Set Up a Graffiti Hotline
Consider Local Anti-Graffiti Laws
Launch Adopt-a-Spot
Conduct a Local Graffiti Assessment
Keep a Database
Engage At-Risk Youth
Offer Removal Kits
Provide Victim Assistance
Work With Law Enforcement
Practice Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
Put Graffiti Vandals "On Notice"
Hold a "Graffiti Summit"
Focus on "Hot Spots"
Work with the Court System
They also talk about the effectiveness of Neighborhood Watch, forming Neighborhood Restoration Teams, spearheading mural projects, Captain Erase coloring books, Graffiti Victim Liason programs, Adopt-a-Block Care Clean-Up partnerships, Community Action Teams and Graffiti Hotlines and more. With so many effective strategies for successfully combatting graffiti, I just don't see how making spray paint more difficult to pruchase could help in any way. In fact, doing so could make the graffiti problem even worse.
Posted by telecom | September 4, 2007 4:53 PM
I agree with Kevin. Randy's "solution" is myopic at best. Hop a lite-rail "train", pick up a bag of paint at the Beaverton Freddie's, and you're good to go.
If these folks are willing to climb out onto signs overhanging freeways, do you think a free train-ride's going to bother them?
Posted by Max | September 4, 2007 4:57 PM
If I remember correctly, that Reed student caught tagging was quoted as saying, in effect, that her "art" trumped other people’s property rights.
Until “graffiti artists” understand property rights and respect the property of others, no stop-gap measures like spray paint ordinances will solve the problem.
Posted by Steve Buckstein | September 4, 2007 5:24 PM
Then they should make their property available for all the other artists who might want to graffito it.
I like to apply my tag with a ten-pound maul.
Posted by godfry | September 4, 2007 6:03 PM
There must be good news hidden in all this. If the police can add to their work load the clearance rate for crimes of rape, and auto theft must have improved.
Can we take that as a positive result Commissioner?
MW
Posted by M.W. | September 4, 2007 7:07 PM
"Somehow the good commissioner's charm..."
Maybe I can take some charm lessons from you.
Posted by Randy Leonard | September 4, 2007 7:57 PM
If there is no consequences for crime, then why not commit it. As long as the "book and release" system stays in place there is no reason to not commit crime in Portland. This is the kind of community that Portland is working for. When you don't want to finance anything but bike lanes then you can all cry in your micro brews. Locking away the spray paint is not going to do a bit of good.
Posted by Jennifer | September 4, 2007 8:03 PM
Randy,
After your lengthy dissertation on the evils of hardware stores and other Portland spray paint providers I have decided that you can't be voted out of office TOO SOON.
Let's tackle just a few of your insane solutions:
QUOTE: "He suggested they could just quit selling that kind of paint and all by itself, that would reduce a lot of the graffiti in Portland."
COMMENT: Taggers might consider a different color scheme.
QUOTE: "In fact, Portland's ordinance is based on similar ordinances in city's around the US from California to New York."
COMMENT: Sounds a lot like the reasoning behind giving huge tax abatements for the Pearl District or South Macadam or the Convention Center or PCD's probable gift of money for a Convention Hotel. "Everyone else is giving away money, why can't we be like them?" But I digress...
QUOTE: "However, the Police Officer in charge of graffiti abatement in Portland testified he has no chance to turn the corner on the graffiti epidemic..
COMMENT: You couldn't give us ANY CONFIDENCE that the city of Portland would have the investigators or enforcement offices to take care of the problem.
Posted by Carol | September 4, 2007 8:19 PM
Maybe I can take some charm lessons from you.
Wow! This is starting to sound about as grown up as a Portland City Council meeting. Nana nana boo boo to you, too. Why don't you save some of that snot-nosed attitude for your buddies like Homer Williams?
I should have let the grace and style of this lovely screed speak for itself.
Posted by Jack Bog | September 4, 2007 8:29 PM
Wow, Jack. It must be great to be you.
On a regular basis, you get to make accusations of corruption, name call ("You're getting dippier than he is lately.")all while creating an atmosphere on your blog where commenter's regularly post offensive, horrible and slanderous things about me and other electeds'. Somehow, you then muster up the verve to react with wide eyed indignation if you get even a fraction of what you dish out in return.
I don't know if this is your way of honoring the memory of Andy Kaufman or if you are truly serious.
Either way, you sure are entertaining.
Posted by Randy Leonard | September 4, 2007 8:48 PM
Randy,
Glad your reading... and your comments, "offensive, horrible and slanderous..." I agree with you completely...
Continuing to give away tax dollars on your pet projects, including the incredible amount of tax dollars for your developer friends is OFFENSIVE.
Asking the citizens of Portland to believe the business community is in full support of your spray paint plan is HORRIBLE.
Questioning our appreciation of Andy Kaufman is truly SLANDEROUS.
Posted by Carol | September 4, 2007 9:14 PM
"...all while creating an atmosphere on your blog where commenter's regularly post offensive, horrible and slanderous things about me and other electeds'..."
Oh, dear...slanderous! Well, Randy, why don't you just sue, then. I agree with Jack: Take your snotty attitude elsewhere. If you don't like what's being said about you here, then I advise that you cease to visit this site, and try to put it out of your mind, poor little thing.
People here obviously think you're doing a sh*tty job, hence the contempt that they are expressing. Personally, I don't care; I moved away 5 years ago (and took my high income and those tax dollars I would have paid with me), and idiotic policies like those you and your ilk espouse were the reason. I just hate to see you ruining what used to be a nice city with your smarmy "I-know-what's-best-for-you" attitude.
It must be nice to have a cushy job and be completely unaccountable to the people that you are supposed to be serving. So do tell us, how much payola are you taking from your developer friends who are ruining Portland?
Posted by al | September 4, 2007 9:36 PM
What is really entertaining is watching businesses in CoP figure out how to stay in business like Winks. City Council with Randy's assistance "pearlizes" the NW forcing property values up where our historical businesses have to move like Winks. Winks moves to inner SE, now Randy and Council wants to trolley the district, rezone, and "pearlize", then Winks will have to move again, or fold. We have the money for trolleys and trams, but not enforcement.
Add a few more ordinances, don't go after the graffiti offenders, they aren't the problem. Randy, because when you have never been in business, you will never think that each one of those ordinances really cost a dime. Too bad we don't have a Council that ever worked outside of government.
Posted by Lee | September 4, 2007 9:47 PM
Either way, you sure are entertaining.
I'll hold this post up against this comment any day, and ask the world, Who's the comical blowhard in this picture?
PS: If the cops in Old Town aren't on the take from all the drug traffic that persists there year after year, they're stupider than they are lazy.
Posted by