| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Air Force Changing Tattoo Policy |
| 2009-12-06 |
| I don't know what the big deal about tattoos is. When somebody walks in with a tattoo and an attitude connected to that tattoo, then that may be one thing, but usually it's not the case. Until someone does some pure science on this, I wouldn't worry about it. One week after the Air Force adopted a strict prohibition of tattoos on the "saluting arm," the new policy has been scrapped. A spokeswoman for the Air Force Recruiting Service in San Antonio, Christa D'Andrea, said the regulation that took effect Nov. 25 has been dropped and the entire tattoo policy will be reviewed. "It's an effort to standardize the policy for all members of the Air Force," D'Andrea said. As many as 17,000 recruits who joined under the delayed entry program were potentially affected by the ban on right-arm body art. The Air Force said it did not want tattoos to be seen when an airman salutes. The updated policy also prohibited tattoos on either hand. This week some recruits were told they had been disqualified under the new rule even though their tattoos had been approved under previous, more lenient guidelines. The tattoo ban was first reported Monday by News10 and generated national attention and controversy. D'Andrea acknowledged media coverage played a role in the decision to reconsider the tattoo crackdown. "It was unfortunate there were recruits caught in the middle," she said. Enlistees who were not able to begin basic training this week at Lackland Air Force base because of the new tattoo policy would be rescheduled for future dates, D'Andrea said. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #2 Some time ago, the Military decided that there were plenty of reasons that tatoos were not a good thing. Firstly, the health issue. Losing soldiers to disease due to un-cleaned inking needles. Secondly, some were scrawling their body with unit numbers or slogans which in turn made it dangerous during capture. This also goes with the fact that their loved ones may be identified by the ink. Then there is the fact that gang members were entering the military with their gang tatoos could be idenitified that way by opposing gangs and internal strife would ensue. Lastly, the command thought of it an unprofessional or low life thing to do. I believe the furor started in the 70's in order to reform the way the military was looked at. I knew a troop once that tatooed his social security number and numerically precise bar-code on many parts of his body so they could tell who just got blown up by an IED. |
| Posted by: newc 2009-12-06 18:02 |
| #1 ...The USAF has been...well...slightly schizo about its tattoo policies for years now. USAF Recruiters are and have been forbidden to have any visible tattoos (as its a special duty assignment, they can enforce the heck outta that one). And since the mid-90s they've been bouncing back and forth between none or some. My guess is that somebody at HQ USAF saw a tat they didn't like and pulled a few strings to get AFMPC (the folks that make said regs) to push it out. The Chief of Staff, General Schwartz, probably never even saw the damned thing until it started causing problems. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2009-12-06 17:27 |