Off Topic Cafe If it doesn't belong in any of the other forums. Post all Off Topic stuff here.

Tattoos and the Air Force

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-03-2009 | 07:10 AM
  #1  
Visionz's Avatar
Thread Starter
Administrator
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 23,223
Likes: 6
From: Upstate NY
Vehicle: 2010 Genesis 2.0T
Default Tattoos and the Air Force

Article

QUOTE
BENICIA — It wasn't a sexy half-naked lounging lady. It doesn't say "Mom."

Josh Parker's months-old tattoo just says his first name, in Hebrew, a language he said he admires.

But those six inches of lettering running across his right biceps were enough to bar him from entering the U.S. Air Force on Monday under a policy instituted just last week for those not fully enrolled in the service.

Parker, 18, was called to his recruitment office Monday morning, the day he was scheduled to report for basic training, for a review of the tattoo.

"They said, 'Can you salute me?' and they were just like, 'Oh,'"‰" Parker said of his surprising turn in luck.

Bags packed and good-byes wished, Parker found himself shocked and alone when he was told his tattoo now meant a "no go" for the Air Force.

"They didn't know what to say or to do," Parker added. "I'm just kind of confused about why they couldn't have contacted me over the weekend."

Parker joined the Air Force's delayed entry program in March, and he has been waiting since graduating from Benicia High School for a job to open up in the special forces division.

"There are no tattoos (allowed) on the right arm or the hands — that's the modification," said Christa D'Andrea, chief of public affairs for Air Force Recruiting Services in San Antonio. "(It is) in an effort to keep up the military image."

The recruiting policy was adjusted when Air Force
Advertisement
physical training outfits — the ones members exercise in — were designated as official uniforms for the military branch.

The short sleeves of physical training outfits reveal arm tattoos, particularly when a salute is being executed, recruiters told Parker.

The former policy allowed for tattoos that covered no more than 25 percent of the skin — a regulation Parker had strictly complied with, and even had measured and documented the same day the policy was instituted, he said.

D'Andrea said she does not think the tattoo policy change will affect recruitment. Based on the first week of the modified policy, though, D'Andrea is forecasting the barring of about 15 delayed entry program recruits a week, she said. Recruits as far advanced as basic training could be affected, but not those beyond that point, she said.

Each case will be looked at individually, D'Andrea said, and recruits will be able to re-enter the program at the point they left off if they choose to remove their tattoos.

Parker's parents were upset Monday after hearing the news. Parker said he did not yet know what he will do next — remove the tattoo or consider another military branch.

"Everything he's been training for, working for, preparing for — it's all shot," said Parker's dad, Kevin. "He's given a year of his life waiting on this thing — not going to college in the fall (and) passed up on some jobs."


This seems pretty crazy to me, I was wondering what everyone else thought. If you want to fight for our country you should be able to. Maybe the Air Force should change their uniforms to long sleeves?
Old 12-03-2009 | 09:59 AM
  #2  
i8acobra's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,735
Likes: 3
From: Vegas, Baby, Vegas!!!
Vehicle: '14 Ford F-150
Default

I'm 100% behind this. The military represents this country on the ground all over the world. The military isn't just about blowin' stuff up. Many cultures are offended by body art. Even those that aren't offended usually have a negative view of it. As long as it's able to be covered up, I'm fine with it, but members of the military should have no exposed body art or piercings except a single piercing in the ear for females only. Being willing to die for your country should not be the sole qualification for service.
Old 12-03-2009 | 11:42 AM
  #3  
tibbykid91's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: North Carolina
Vehicle: 2008 Tiburon
Default

^+1
Old 12-03-2009 | 03:04 PM
  #4  
187sks's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 2
From: Lacey, WA
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
Default

I really don't care, my only issue is that if the rule is changed, I think people already signed up at the very least should be exempted, or there should be a couple of months before it kicks in. Other than that, there are other branches that don't care.
Old 12-03-2009 | 11:30 PM
  #5  
ereeves116's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
From: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle: 2002 Accent
Default

QUOTE (i8acobra @ Dec 3 2009, 09:59 AM)
Being willing to die for your country should not be the sole qualification for service.


No it shouldn't be but when we're trapped in an endless war with a constant need for more troops, I would have figured that the military had been letting things slide a little more.




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:28 PM.