The quality or lack thereof is irrelevant here. The act of putting something on a building in which you have no ownership interest nor permission to do so be it a sign or graffiti or a copy of a Rembrandt ranges from vandalism to destruction of property. Such a law prohibiting owner removal of graffiti should constitute a taking without just compensation. Hopefully, the aggrieved property owner will take this to the highest Court in the land which should rule with enough force to kick the council, mayor and the rest of the turds supporting the law back to the ideological shit holes where they were initially crapped out into the atmosphere.
We are in utter agreement.
During my last post, I was imagining coming out of my home one day and finding that Andy Warhol had created one of his monstrosities on my garage door and the law requires that I leave it there because, you know, it was done by Andy Warhol.
That’s just stupid on any piece of property that falls within the jurisdiction of the US constitution, though It may play well in Cuba or NK.