Marines Ban Tattoos (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


pinksugarsub -> Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 4:03:07 PM)

By Thomas Watkins, Associated Press WriterOCEANSIDE, Calif. — Five tattooed skulls stretch from Marine Cpl. Jeremy Slaton's right elbow to his wrist, spelling out the word "Death." He planned to add a tattoo spelling "Life" on his left arm, but that's on hold because of a Marine policy taking effect Sunday.The Marines are banning any new, extra-large tattoos below the elbow or the knee, saying such body art is harmful to the Corps' spit-and-polish image.
Slaton and other grunts are not pleased.
"I guess I'll get the other half later," grumbled the 24-year-old leatherneck from Eden Prairie, Minn. "It's kind of messed up."
For many Marines, getting a tattoo is a rite of passage. They commonly get their forearms inscribed to remember fallen comrades, combat tours or loved ones, and often ask for exotic designs that incorporate the Marine motto, Semper Fi, or "Always faithful."
Dozens of Marines from Camp Pendleton, the West Coast's biggest Marine base, made last-minute trips to tattoo parlors in nearby Oceanside before the ban kicked in.
"This is something I love to do," said Cpl. David Nadrchal, 20, of Pomona, who made an appointment to get an Iraqi flag and his deployment dates etched onto his lower leg. "The fact I can't put something on my body that I want — it's a big thing to tell me I can't do that."
Nadrchal said he is unsure whether he will re-enlist: "There's all these little things. They are slowly chipping away at us."
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James T. Conway announced the policy change last week.
"Some Marines have taken the liberty of tattooing themselves to a point that is contrary to our professional demeanor and the high standards America has come to expect from us," he said. "I believe tattoos of an excessive nature do not represent our traditional values."

ON DEADLINE: Marines clamp down on tattoos
The ban is aimed primarily at "sleeve" tattoos, the large and often elaborate designs on the biceps and forearms of many Marines. Similar designs on the lower legs will be forbidden as well. So will very large tattoos on the upper arm, if they are visible when a Marine wears his workout T-shirt. Small, individual tattoos will still be allowed on the arms and legs. (The Marines already ban them on the hands.)
Marines already tattooed are exempt from the ban but cannot add to their designs; anyone caught with fresh ink in the wrong places could be barred from re-enlistment or face disciplinary action. Getting a prohibited tattoo could constitute a violation of a lawful order, punishable by up to two years in prison and a dishonorable discharge, Marine spokesman 1st Lt. Brian Donnolly said.
Unit commanders must photograph and document sleeve tattoos to ensure Marines do not add to their ink.
The Marines and the other branches of the military already ban tattoos that could be offensive or disruptive, such as images that are sexist, vulgar, gang-related or extremist.
The Army, which has been doing most of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and is struggling to fill its ranks, actually relaxed its tattoo restrictions last year. Soldiers can now get ink on the back of their hands and the lower back of the neck.
The Navy last year decreed that tattoos visible while in short-sleeve uniform cannot be larger than the wearer's hand. The Air Force says tattoos should be covered up if they are bigger than one-quarter the size of the exposed body part.
Tattoo artist Jerry Layton at the Body Temple Tattoo Studio in Oceanside said he was booked up with Marines rushing to beat the deadline.
"These are guys that are dying in the war," Layton said. "They can fight, but they can't get a tattoo? It's ridiculous."
 
http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2007-03-28-marines_N.htm
 
pinksugarsub




TheHeretic -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 5:10:48 PM)

      Wow.  The new restrictions still allow a lot more than the policies of 20 years ago.  Guess the rules got very lax for a while.




aliengrace -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 5:51:53 PM)

...that last line says it all, doesn't it? Your job could cause others to harm/kill your body but you can't personally modify your own body?  What sort of fucked-up ideas about State/military ownership of your body is this?  The priorities are all wrong.  You would think that of anywhere, somewhere which should be THANKING you for putting yourself and your life in the line of fire, would also say: I respect your free choice in your decision to put your body into danger, I respect your free choice to modify this same body.  But I think this mindset is inherently un-Military; having this view of the individual body in relation to the State is not consistent with the war machine.

Gah, "traditional values".




FatDomDaddy -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 5:52:28 PM)

So don't join or get out when you Enlistment is over.

Nobody is making anyone enlist in the USMC.

Semper Fi!




TheHeretic -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 5:57:55 PM)

      I wonder if the policy is still that an infected tattoo is a crime under the UCMJ.  The charge in my day was 'destruction of government property.'  You choose to raise your hand and take the oath, they own you.




thompsonx -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (4/14/2007 6:02:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

     Wow.  The new restrictions still allow a lot more than the policies of 20 years ago.  Guess the rules got very lax for a while.

Rich:
You are exactly right.  The rules used to say "nothing visible while in uniform"
thompson




jthaddeus -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/25/2007 8:38:05 PM)

I still believe it's a secret Army ploy. I was turned away from the Corps due to "excessive tattooing" 2 years ago, and my recruiter turned me over to an Army recruiter. 6 weeks later I had red Georgia sand on my boots.

-- James




ChicagoSwitchMal -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/25/2007 8:48:09 PM)

yeah I thought there were more restrcitve rules 20 years ago when I was in. Definitely if it got infected - you were in trouble. But I didn't think they were allowed. They just didn't enforce it.




AquaticSub -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 4:56:33 AM)

Damn it, what was wrong with the rule that it couldn't show in their uniforms?

*grumbles* I guess there go my tattooed Marine fantasies...




pahunkboy -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 8:33:46 AM)

while they are at it- maybe a law against being too sexy?

i near wreck drving thru construction.

also minum penis measrements are in order

bulging muscles

giime 25 pushups [while i assume the poisition]




Bearlee -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 8:42:51 AM)

 

ROFLMAO   "giime 25 pushups [while i assume the poisition] "


You go, boy!!!


MsB




chellekitty -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 9:11:03 AM)

i talked to my best friend from high school, who's husband is in the Army and worked as a recruiter...he said they would even take me and give me a gun!! lol...no other branch will take me with my mental health history...bipolar with massive hospitalization and documented hallucinations and suicide attempts and also documented drug addiction and at the time less than 3 months clean....hehe...yes...give me a gun...tell me its ok to shoot people...wait....chelle....don't say these things out loud...

no, i do not have suicidal or homocidal urges or thoughts nor do i have any plans to do any of those things....none what so ever....




popeye1250 -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 9:22:24 AM)

Funny, no "extremist" tattoos? LOL, the Marines are a pretty "extreme" group of people.
Are they going "pc" or something?
No "Kill al qeada" tattoos anymore?
When I was in the Navy during the Vietnam days I don't think there were any "restrictions" on tattoos.




pahunkboy -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 9:28:26 AM)

IMO tatts on hands, face, neck are a no no.

I personnally would not get any tatt taht i could not hide.  one reason is- there are still some very old school judges- and if in front of a judge- i dont want a tatt to taint the matter.




LotusSong -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 9:43:42 AM)

I had heard about this awhile back. Seems some of the enlistees thought having "fuck you" tattooed on the outside edge of their right hand so the superior officer would see it when they saluted was cute.
 
I don't blame the corps.  save your play for when your responsibilities are done, kiddies..it's the grown up thing to do.  And just know.. what is so all fired important for your "self-expression" now,  won't mean diddly in your later years.  Choose your battles.




thornhappy -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 3:22:52 PM)

..and the deadline's long past; the original article was from March.

thornhappy




windchymes -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 4:50:16 PM)

I see a lot of elderly people half naked in hospital beds every single day, and let me tell you....if you could see what your tattoos are going to look like in about 40 or 50 years, you'd probably never get one, lol. 




AquaticSub -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 5:14:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes

I see a lot of elderly people half naked in hospital beds every single day, and let me tell you....if you could see what your tattoos are going to look like in about 40 or 50 years, you'd probably never get one, lol. 


Awww... But I want to gross out the nurses! [;)]




feastie -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 5:28:13 PM)

When you sign up for the military, any branch of it, you are basically handing over your life for the duration.  Your body, your brain, you.  It's not just a job, it's a life.  You eat it, breathe it and sleep it.  If you don't want to be owned, don't sign up, it's very simple.  If you do sign up anyway, then you'll have to forego your desires for whatever things might be against the rules until such time as you are discharged.  What is it with people thinking that life is worth living without rules? 




Pulpsmack -> RE: Marines Ban Tattoos (9/26/2007 5:29:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: aliengrace

...that last line says it all, doesn't it? Your job could cause others to harm/kill your body but you can't personally modify your own body?  What sort of fucked-up ideas about State/military ownership of your body is this?  The priorities are all wrong.  You would think that of anywhere, somewhere which should be THANKING you for putting yourself and your life in the line of fire, would also say: I respect your free choice in your decision to put your body into danger, I respect your free choice to modify this same body.  But I think this mindset is inherently un-Military; having this view of the individual body in relation to the State is not consistent with the war machine.

Gah, "traditional values".




With respect to the Armed Forces, the Marines are a very small and (more) selective group. Enlistment in any service is voluntary and if you don't like X's policy, then go join Y or Z. I also suspect this is an issue with the growing gang problem in the armed forces. The Army is desperate for bodies, which helps exacerbate the issue. The Marines have more power to be choosy given their smaller number, and it appears this is one method by which they are choosing to preserve the honor and integrity of their corps. BFD as far as I am concerned. If you want to be a Marine that bad, pencil yourself in for laser surgery. Otherwise, join the Army 




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125