Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Opt out
    Posts
    2,285
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    ......

    .........

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Right about.....HERE
    Posts
    1,671
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    Quote Originally Posted by Measure Man View Post
    I thought the Army was already complaining about finding qualified candidates...now they are going to eliminate a huge population for no good reason other than, "us old guys think they aren't cool."
    That is partly the reason. They AREN'T hurting for recruits. In fact, they are starting to cut thousands of those already in and as the AF has shown, one way to reduce the # of people you have to axe is to reduce the # you bring in...
    “I say, imagine in your private life, if you decided that I’m not going to pay my mortgage for a month or two—first of all you’re not saving money by not paying your mortgage. You’re just a dead beat. “

    --Barak Obama


    You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not
    --John Lennon

    Lord of the Pings

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Space Mountain
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    It's also an excellent way to appear as though you're doing something (upholding standards!) while actually doing absolutely nothing to uphold standards that actually translate directly into one's ability to soldier.

    Why not remove everyone who can't pass an APFT or exceeds height / weight? Why not remove anyone who doesn't have a 111111 profile? Why not remove everyone who has a GT score below a certain level? Or has had consistently low NCOER/OER ratings?

    Those aren't all necessarily valid reasons to kick someone out / prevent someone from coming in, but they're a hell of a lot more rational than someone's arm tattoos. It's nothing more than the fashion sensibility and morality of 50 year old white southern baptist males. It's silly.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Right about.....HERE
    Posts
    1,671
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    Quote Originally Posted by MSMUROTC View Post
    Why not remove everyone who can't pass an APFT or exceeds height / weight? Why not remove anyone who doesn't have a 111111 profile? Why not remove everyone who has a GT score below a certain level? Or has had consistently low NCOER/OER ratings?
    That would be a quick way to reduce the Army. Kick out everyone with glasses or ANY hearing loss...
    “I say, imagine in your private life, if you decided that I’m not going to pay my mortgage for a month or two—first of all you’re not saving money by not paying your mortgage. You’re just a dead beat. “

    --Barak Obama


    You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not
    --John Lennon

    Lord of the Pings

  5. #5
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    Quote Originally Posted by Pullinteeth View Post
    That would be a quick way to reduce the Army. Kick out everyone with glasses or ANY hearing loss...
    Exactly. If you were allowed IN with something, you shouldn't be kicked out BECAUSE of it.

    If you want to find bullshit to kick people out for, fine; but at least make it for things that happened DURING their service.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Right about.....HERE
    Posts
    1,671
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Exactly. If you were allowed IN with something, you shouldn't be kicked out BECAUSE of it.

    If you want to find bullshit to kick people out for, fine; but at least make it for things that happened DURING their service.
    When the AF came out with theirs, the rule was either you get it taken off at your own expense or GTFO.... Saddest part is that with PT gear no longer considered a uniform (for this rule and this rule only), most of the "excessive" tats would now be perfectly fine-for males legs no longer matter and for arms, just keep your sleeves down. Neck and hands would still be an issue but that # would have to be small compared to those with sleeves...
    “I say, imagine in your private life, if you decided that I’m not going to pay my mortgage for a month or two—first of all you’re not saving money by not paying your mortgage. You’re just a dead beat. “

    --Barak Obama


    You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not
    --John Lennon

    Lord of the Pings

  7. #7
    Senior Member CORNELIUSSEON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Bordentown, NJ
    Posts
    255
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    In the first place, everyone here is arguing as if this was a new subject. When the war in Iraq came to an end, I said then that the Garrison rule book was being dusted off and everyone needed to get ready. Well, now, the day has arrived, and the Army is now making the return to Garrison life a fact. Everything that has taken place and or is yet to come, is chapter and verse from the Garrison rule book. If you know that you don’t want to adjust your behavior to Garrison standards, then it is time to find a new home. Courtesy Patrols are now in business at Fort Gordon (Where I took Basic Training, 46 Years ago.), Fort Bliss, Foot Hood, Fort Carson, Fort Campbell, and Schofield Barracks, with Schofield Barracks being the place where the return to Garrison Rules is at its fullest.

    I see that some of the people who came in since 9-11-01 are screaming the loudest. That is understandable, since they know nothing other than the past 10 years, but those who were in the Army before the Garrison Rules were relaxed to Wartime Rules should know better. This is NOT a time to complain about how mean the Army is treating you or how they are treating you like children. Many of you and your friends brought it on yourself by not changing with the time when given the earliest warnings. Well, if you don’t like how the Army is treating you today, then make it easy on yourselves and leave at your earliest ETS date. Otherwise, the Army will push your out at their pleasure, and the Army will continue to function without you. Oh, yes, if you have families who live on base, or come on base to shop or make use of the recreational facilities, you need to sit them down and bring them up to date because the Army can ban them from the post for behavior reasons, and they can punish you for their behavior as well.

    As far as squeezing out people by raising standards, that actually can be done. Until the end of the Korean War, the minimum GT score necessary for intake and re-enlistment was 80. Since then, it has risen and fallen as necessary to achieve required enlistment numbers. There is absolutely nothing to prevent it.

    As for Tattoos, they have been banned in the Army for a very long time. It has been only the Navy and Marine Corps that has tolerated Tattoos. The Army has relaxed its Tattoo rule when it needed numbers to make their Enlistment Quotas, but it has never remained relaxed for very long.
    [FONT=arial black]SSG Cornelius Seon, USA (Retired)
    [/FONT][FONT=Verdana][SIZE=2][COLOR=#000000][SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]
    [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=4][B][FONT=arial black]We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.

    H.L. Mencken
    [/FONT][/B][/SIZE]

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    The Danger Zone
    Posts
    59
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Re: Soldiers told new rules governing tattoos, grooming standards on the way

    One quick note I'd like to make: if we have enough soldiers to do the Courtesy Patrols, we have too many damn soldiers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •