PDA

View Full Version : Tattoo regs



scrapper155
11-21-10, 08:27 AM
I entered the Corps a week after Sept. 11 in 2001. I got out in 2005 and have regretted it ever since. During the time that I was in the tattoo rules and regs were very LAX and my unit didnt make me document my new ink as long as it was within policy, which it was. I have almost 2 full sleeves, and most of it was done while I was in the Corps.

My question is this. Would I be allowed to re-enter the Corps with my current ink? I have picture proof that I had heavily tattooed arms while in the service but would that still count and would I be under the "gradnfather" clause?

Thansk for any response on this subject. Semper Fi!

GyC
12-03-10, 09:52 PM
You wouldn't be grandfathered... S/F

sparkie
12-03-10, 10:22 PM
From what I've seen for the new regs All have to be covered with a v neck tee shirt. Sorry.

DrZ
12-03-10, 10:26 PM
Scrapper,
As I read the current regs on tats.... I don't see it happening. With that said, however, I sure would talk to a prior service recruiter.

Good luck!

scrapper155
12-06-10, 09:58 AM
Thanks for the help gents.

scrapper155
06-11-11, 07:30 AM
I know this is an old post but I just have to ask. Why the sudden concern about Marines and their tattoos? When I was in I was told by a SSgt, and I quote- " When it comes to tattoos, Death and destruction are encouraged but no nudity or racism".

Tattoos have been a military tradition forever and now that same tradition is hindering willing individuals from serving their country as a Marine. Of course the ARMY will take me but I only play for one team and that is the USMC.

I know that these policies change with the change of command, as different leaders have different views of tattoos. I just have a hard time digesting the fact that I can no longer serve as a Marine b/c of an old tradition turned taboo by a few individuals with negative opinions of ink on Marines.

USNAviator
06-11-11, 07:50 AM
This is one explanation

In addition to the already prohibited head and neck, Marines cannot get tattoos or brands on their hands, fingers, wrists or inside their mouths, according to Marine Administrative Message 29/10 released Jan. 15, 2010.

Both commissioned and warrant officers are now limited to four tattoos or brands visible when wearing the standard physical training uniform, according to the new policy.

The policy's intent is "to ensure Marines can be assigned whenever and wherever they are needed," stated the message.

The recent change helped to clarify the March 2007 overhaul of the Corps' tattoo policy, which prohibited excessive tattoos covering arms and legs.

"I believe tattoos of an excessive nature do not represent our traditional values. Some 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," said Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps, in a March 19, 2007, message.

The new policy also clarified the size of any tattoos visible in PT uniforms cannot be larger than the wearer's hand with fingers extended and joined and the thumb touching the base of the index finger. The 2007 policy was vague on the size, stating only that very large tattoos or collections of smaller tattoos covering all or most of a person's arms or legs - also called sleeve tattoos - were unauthorized.

scrapper155
06-11-11, 09:52 AM
Thanks for the post.

I just hate that, after 4 years of service, I can no longer serve b/c of tattoos that I got while I was in. I was never reprimanded, demoted or otherwise punished while serving. I had a 285 pft, meritoriously promoted to Cpl and honorably discharged and yet I can no longer server due to tattoos. Times have definately changed and not exactly for the better. I now work as a Federal Correctional Officer and my civilian employer has absolutely no problem with tattoos but the Marine Corps now does!?

Tennessee Top
06-11-11, 10:37 AM
I see your point.

Who's to say some time in the future, a new commandant will agree with you and relax the standards again. May not happen in time to benefit you.

There was a time when we were not so concerned about how others percieved us. Now, we're worried our appearance may actually offend someone...I don't understand. Are we warriors or diplomats?

scrapper155
06-11-11, 12:01 PM
HAHA exactly! Are we not suppose to be intimidating to our enemies?

Besides, the public's perception of tattoos is slowly beginning to change. Nowadays everyone has ink. From the lower class to the wealthy.

Most of the public expects their military personnel to be tattooed because its been that way for so long. You see an old man with a faded pin-up girl, anchor, eagle etc. and you automatically know that he is a veteran but now those days are slowly coming to an end.

Anyway, thanks for the input Master Sgt. Semper Fi.

EGTSpec
06-12-11, 07:12 AM
Proud of your Tats I see, but not of your service enough to fill out your profile.

scrapper155
06-12-11, 01:39 PM
Oh Im proud of my service, I just didnt care weather or not you could read it or not but just in case you are questioning my integrity, I filled it out just for you.

boomer56328
06-12-11, 03:20 PM
Please don't get me started on this issue. The new tattoo policy they implemeted makes me want to scream. I personally think it is beyond stupid. I hope that they someday go back to the way it was. Wishful thinking on my part probably.

rufus1
06-12-11, 03:55 PM
Well I guess it was a good thing that I always got too drunk and did not make it to the Tattoo Parlor and get those flies done flying around my Ahole. But I have to admit it would have made a great conversation piece.

Caesar Augustus
06-12-11, 04:10 PM
I see your point.

Who's to say some time in the future, a new commandant will agree with you and relax the standards again. May not happen in time to benefit you.

There was a time when we were not so concerned about how others percieved us. Now, we're worried our appearance may actually offend someone...I don't understand. Are we warriors or diplomats?

After seeing the ROE the fact that we actually got in trouble for getting into firefights in PT gear because we didn't think it prudent to waste time donning cammies and just threw on flak, kevlar and grabbed our rifles probably leaning towards the latter.

oldtop
06-13-11, 10:34 AM
IMHO the current regs are silly, expecially when they cause good Marines to be denied re-enlistment or force seperation...if the powers that be are so concerned about ink showing, then go back to the long sleeve blouse year round and do away with the charlie shirt alltogethor. When I first entered the Corps, the only duty station in the world where the charlie shirt was authorized for wear was Gitmo, even though recruits were issued 3 of them. Everywhere else, the long sleeve blouse was worn.