cops suing over blm mural

[horselightning]

BLM mural lawsuit: City arts chief approved it without knowing about controversial parts – Palo Alto Daily Post

padailypost.com

City seeks to avoid trial over Black Lives Matter mural

Seeking to avoid a summer trial, Palo Alto is asking the courts for a quick ruling on a lawsuit from a group of police officers who claimed they were offended by a Black Lives Matter mural that 16 artists painted in front of City Hall in June 2020.

www.paloaltoonline.com

the cops says mural puts a target n their back. they city should just paint over it. end of problem.

 

[Lord-Humungus]

Poor little police offended by a painting. Reminds me of people offended by a statue. Damn snowflakes grow a set of balls

 

[Lumpy 1]

What do we want, DEAD COPS, when do we want it .. NOW! .... BLM..

BLM/Democrats .. squats on blacks and shits all over them.. then laughs all the way to the bank..

 

[drudge X]

Lol.. graffiti by blacks that's art man. Everyone else, public nuisance and a fine.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

BLM mural lawsuit: City arts chief approved it without knowing about controversial parts – Palo Alto Daily Post

padailypost.com

City seeks to avoid trial over Black Lives Matter mural

Seeking to avoid a summer trial, Palo Alto is asking the courts for a quick ruling on a lawsuit from a group of police officers who claimed they were offended by a Black Lives Matter mural that 16 artists painted in front of City Hall in June 2020.

www.paloaltoonline.com

the cops says mural puts a target n their back. they city should just paint over it. end of problem.

Not because of content, but for safety reasons, murals should not be painted on roadways.

For one thing, it reduces traction, increasing the risk of a motorist losing control of his vehicle and having a collision.

For another, it is distracting to drivers, and can impair their ability to see and interpret legitimate road markings.

Roads are for driving on, not for painting on.

 

[Concerned American]

Poor little police offended by a painting. Reminds me of people offended by a statue. Damn snowflakes grow a set of balls

More importantly, the paint changes the coefficient of friction on that roadway in the rain, creating a public safety issue. It rains in the SF bay area. The mural should be sand blasted away as all painted murals on any public roadway should.

 

[martybegan]

Not because of content, but for safety reasons, murals should not be painted on roadways.

For one thing, it reduces traction, increasing the risk of a motorist losing control of his vehicle and having a collision.

For another, it is distracting to drivers, and can impair their ability to see and interpret legitimate road markings.

Roads are for driving on, not for painting on.

Plus it gets government into content regulation, and they aren't supposed to do that.

Convince some private sidewalk owner or some private building to let you mark up their wall and have at it.

 

[martybegan]

More importantly, the paint changes the coefficient of friction on that roadway in the rain, creating a public safety issue. It rains in the SF bay area. The mural should be sand blasted away as all painted murals on any public roadway should.

They can use an abrasive coating that reduces the impact on friction, but those coatings have to be replaced, and would have to be part of the paint mix used by the artists.

 

[San Souci]

BLM mural lawsuit: City arts chief approved it without knowing about controversial parts – Palo Alto Daily Post

padailypost.com

City seeks to avoid trial over Black Lives Matter mural

Seeking to avoid a summer trial, Palo Alto is asking the courts for a quick ruling on a lawsuit from a group of police officers who claimed they were offended by a Black Lives Matter mural that 16 artists painted in front of City Hall in June 2020.

www.paloaltoonline.com

the cops says mural puts a target n their back. they city should just paint over it. end of problem.

Good. These BLM are Thugs.

 

[Concerned American]

They can use an abrasive coating that reduces the impact on friction, but those coatings have to be replaced, and would have to be part of the paint mix used by the artists.

That is true--who pays for it? Doesn't address the issues with content or distraction in an urban area.

 

[para bellum]

Did anyone read the links? The mural is long gone. It was gone before the cops even sued the city over it!

Jeez, those cops need to move on...

 

[martybegan]

That is true--who pays for it? Doesn't address the issues with content or distraction in an urban area.

I agree things like that shouldn't be done on public property, just saying (as an Engineer) the slippery conditions created by doing it can be mitigated.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I agree things like that shouldn't be done on public property, just saying (as an Engineer) the slippery conditions created by doing it can be mitigated.

It's better not to create a safety hazard in the first place than to create it, together with some measures to mitigate it.

Painting murals on roadways is just plain stupid. That'sd not what roads are for, and it makes it less safe to use roads for their intended purpose.

 

[martybegan]

It's better not to create a safety hazard in the first place than to create it, together with some measures to mitigate it.

Painting murals on roadways is just plain stupid. That'sd not what roads are for, and it makes it less safe to use roads for their intended purpose.

To me the bigger issue is content endorsement by a government, local or otherwise.

 

[TheParser]

It was sad to note the ethnicity of some of the mural painters.

Since they did the work in 2020, some of them may have subsequently learned through bitter experience that they were naive.

 

[Concerned American]

I agree things like that shouldn't be done on public property, just saying (as an Engineer) the slippery conditions created by doing it can be mitigated.

No doubt. But were they, and apparently what I am hearing is that it is moot as the mural has been removed?

 

[martybegan]

No doubt. But were they, and apparently what I am hearing is that it is moot as the mural has been removed?

The goal is to prevent it from happening in the future.

 

[Concerned American]

The goal is to prevent it from happening in the future.

As far as I am concerned, it is graffiti and there are already statutes against graffiti on public property. Meh.