A friend on facebook posted the following...his Son was disqualified from going to boot camp because of a tattoo...not what the tattoo was, but because it was on his Rt. arm...
Are you kidding...the answer was No!
Check out this from "Kevin Parker is in shock! The recruiter called Josh today and asked him to come down to have his tatoo checked out before he left today for boot camp. TODAY, they disqualified him because of a new policy regarding tatoo's that came down from the top last Wednesday. No tatoos on the right arm (saluting arm). He is now disqualified.
How sad is this?
That is pretty ridiculous. I mean, how many commanding officers have tattoos themselves? Maybe they should also make a rule stating that if the commanding officer has a tattoo on his right arm he doesn't get to be saluted.
There have been regulations regarding tattoos in the military for over 50 years. I had to pay a 600.00 fine for getting one without permission. My brother was demoted and also fined for having his on his forearms finished. There are various regulations regarding the size and placement of them in general nothing on the face neck or arms below the level of a rolled sleeve. They certainly are not allowed on the hands. However this young man should have been made aware of this long before his ship out date and given a chance to apply for a waiver. Most previous tattoos are allowed with exceptions but there are always those who are sticklers for the rules.
Without knowing the size, placement, and color of the tattoo I really can't say whether or not this was an actual regulation violation or just a cop out to cover another dis-qualifier (yes it does happen, and often) If this was his only dis-qualifier the recruiter should have been hustling to get a waiver signed and filed. I do not understand what the issue is?
The freedoms we take for granted as civilians are not equally given as a soldier. For instance a Non-rank must have permission to marry from his command and it can be denied. Expressing your opinion about the president is tricky at best and though unlikely can be prosecuted as treason and subverting the chain of command. You do not have freedom of speech or to gather or to petition for redress of grievances. In fact until you get up in rank being in the military is as close as some will ever come to being in prison, you do everything, including go to the bathroom on another's schedule. If you don't like it then your choices are limited and can involve a court martial and imprisonment if you voice your objections loud enough. To top it all off today chances are you will be sent to a combat zone for a year at a time or more and cycled back again every few months, despite your job specialty or expertise you most likely will be in some kind of combat.
Pretty crazy isn't it. When I was in, I had a buddy get an Article 15 because he shaved his head and then got a sunburn on it. He was told he damaged government property.
I'm almost certain the Marines first initiated a new tattoo policy over a year ago and then it spread through the entire military. I think it was a PR stunt to give our military a better image since more than ever before in history have they been in front of live cameras for the entire world to see.
For those that do not know, a waiver is an exception to the rule and often given to people who have a demonstrated skill that the military is in need of.
I had forgotten about the head shaving thing. My first year in a bunch of guys in my platoon all shaved our heads down with a razor, because we saw some SF guys do it. We all got a month restricted duty and fined half our pay for 45 days, that sucked....once again, damaging government property, and abusing equipment.
It's going to be discussed on the 11:00pm news...I'll update the details in the am. Not sure of the placement of the tattoo or what it is of...very interesting.
Hmmmmm... so instead of burning draft cards in the 60's they should have gotten tattoos.Pretty weird.
Would it be 'ridiculous' and 'stupid' if a recruit had a gang tatoo on his neck, or a swastika on his forehead?
Look'd up some info on tattoos and the military...here is an answer to your question...
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
Tattoos can have nudity, guns, murder, death or gang affiliation. The catch is that there can't be any hate type of tattoos, so some gang tattoos may be in question. KKK & Aryan Nation would be good examples of this. Tattoos are not to cover more than 1/4 of the body part that they are on, but if it is covered by the uniform, who knows? We had a Master Sergeant with full sleeves. He just never wore short sleeve shirts to work.
And is this a reasonable restriction, in your opinion?
So we all agree this is a reasonable restriction then?
I don't make the restrictions dude, just reporting what I found out online in regards to the tattoo's and the military. My opinion...love tattoos in good taste as these young men have...hate tattoos are not my thing nor do I enjoy looking at them...again that is my opinion, not the militarys or anyone elses.
This one does not ask questions to elicit an answer or engage in dialogue - it is just to create animosity in the hope you will become annoyed enough to attack it verbally and then it will complain and get you banned.
<snipped - no personal attacks in the Forums>
Do you ever have anything to say that is not attacking what some one else said?
What's ridiculous is that it's about WHERE it is, not WHAT it is.
It's as if he really likes to scrape the bottom of the stupid question barrel.
Okay...back to the subject...they were joining the Air Force, tattoos are on the right arm above the elbow and it is a tattoo of their name in oriental writing.
If they have the tattoos removed, they can join. The tattoos are on two different recruits and both were told yesterday of their disqualification, the day they were to start boot camp.
Hopefully it all works out for them, what I am getting from all of this is the Air Force is a lot harder than Marines, Navy and Army to join with tattoos, and as Scott has stated, nothing above collar or on hands.
Each of the services policies vary significantly, and in recent years the Army's has changed to become more liberal in allowing them but not on the neck, face, or below the wrist. For the troops it just is what it is, the Air Force has a long tradition of being most restrictive, especially at the point of enlistment.
In the last 3 years the Navy and the Marine Corps have been refusing recruits with tats below the elbow. What folks need to realize is that this is how you establish control of a large number of people. Its a necessity in the Military.....not society at large. Get used to the idea though. Its how most Federal regulation works....for the masses, not the individual.
this is a crazy rule.....what is tattoo got to do with duties, obedience??
NO FRIGGIN WAY! Unbelievable! Times have really changed sense I was in I guess. Geez.
These young men and women today are not being drafted and volunteering is a loose term when you consider that what they are doing is in fact applying for a guaranteed Job for a period of 4 to 8 years. If you ask someone to hire you then you have to go by their conditions and regulations. People need to grow up and seriously stop whining. This boy was not kicked out and is still going ahead with his enlistment on the grounds that he remove the tattoo. Obviously he sees it as a non-issue and is willing to pay the price to enlist.
Having served 8 years as a US Marine I can tell you that there are many regulations and rules that most civilians would find appalling. That's part of the package when you sign your life over to the military, YOU WILL DO AS YOU'RE TOLD. If you want to enlist then you have to abide by their rules. What so many consider trivial and non-sense has a purpose and a meaning the military called discipline and good order. That's what keeps people alive in combat and that's what is needed to control half a million hormonal teenagers fresh out of mom's house. Maybe if kids were taught that the world doesn't revolve around them at home it wouldn't be such a harsh wake-up call to reality when they enlist.
I had two sons that served in the Navy. You would think that with the long history of seafarers getting tattoos that it would be a given for sailors. Well yes and no.
There was a long standing knowledge that if you want to be an officer you just don't get a tattoo that shows anywhere in a uniform. There are some cases such as mustangs that came into the USNA from the ranks that could skirt this but not often.
Some sailors would get them on shore leave when they were drunk but advancement came very slowly for somebody looking for a carreer.
Hmm Im already in and I can get sleeves if I want too and noone would even really notice specially now since its winter and our sleeves are down.
by Zaiden Jace4 years ago
Do you think a person should be disqualified from a job just because they have tattoos?
by My Esoteric21 months ago
Today, July 27, 2016 Donald Trump first said: "They probably have her 33,000 e-mails. I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 e-mails that she lost and deleted because you'd see some beauties there. So...
by Demas W Jasper2 years ago
In displaying his vitriole and quick temper, has Mr.Trump disqualified himself for POTUS?
by Nancy McClintock5 years ago
What can you do if you feel you have been unfairly disqualified from Google Adsense, It keeps you from joining many of HubPages programs such as the apprentice and ebay. Will hub pages open up other means of...
by Sassygals5 years ago
What is it with so many otherwise sane people marking up their bodies with tattoos? I don't get it.Tattoos are permanent. Years from now you may not want what you want now. What's the deal with that?
by Alem Belton6 years ago
Can anyone name 10 R-Rated comedy movies released withing the last two years that have not contained any homo-sexually erotic or suggestive scenes?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.