Fresh ink rules out a career in police
- Thread starter Erebos
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aspidites ramsayi
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
Sezzzzzzzzz
Very Well-Known Member
That would be great Pinoy. Id definately be interested if anyone can find an official survey of how many people have tatts. Seems to me that at least every 2nd person has one nowadays.
Aussie-Pride
Well-Known Member
The ADF has a strict policy on tattoos and body piercing. Tattoos and/or brands are prohibited on the face of candidates wishing to enter the Navy, Army, or Air Force. For Navy candidates, the face includes the scalp, ears and neck. For Army candidates, tattoos are prohibited on the face (which includes the scalp ears and neck) and the hands. Air Force candidates are prohibited from having or obtaining tattoos on the face excluding the scalp, ears and neck.
Additionally, female candidates are permitted to have tattooed eyebrow forms (excluding eyeliner) providing it follows the natural arch line of eyebrows and is of a natural colour that matches the colour of the hair. Females may have lip tattooing to enhance the outline of the lips providing it does not look unnatural ie. is not outlined in black, is not a non-flesh colour and does not change the natural shape of the lips.
Apart from the face (and hands for Army candidates), tattoos and/or brands are permitted on other parts of the body, unless the tattoo or brand is considered offensive and undermines the dignity and authority of The Australian Defence Force. Further guidance on this policy can be provided by contacting Defence Force Recruiting.
Candidates who have tattoos for religious reasons which are in those areas prohibited above, are advised that Defence Force Recruiting is required to seek approval from the appropriate single Service authority prior to applicant appointment or enlistment.
My brother served and his covered in tats, he had issues with having a southern cross on his neck.
Erebos
Very Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,590
- Reaction score
- 0
In the defense your actually not aloud to get tattooed while in the service not saying this happens but regardless you have to ask permission! they will take you with tattoos so firstly your wrong and second if you have a hard boss and get a tattoo you can be charged the same as getting sun burn
Cheers Brenton
tarafritz2011
Active Member
I have four tattoos - they are all small and all hidden, except the one on the back of my neck which is only visible if I have my hair up.
This being said, I don't have my tattoos to live up to the image of being tough or cool. All my tattoos represent a part of who I am - therefore I would feel personally offended if somebody asked me to remove them. Luckily enough, I'm not in the police force
This being said, I don't have my tattoos to live up to the image of being tough or cool. All my tattoos represent a part of who I am - therefore I would feel personally offended if somebody asked me to remove them. Luckily enough, I'm not in the police force
Aussie-Pride
Well-Known Member
I have four tattoos - they are all small and all hidden, except the one on the back of my neck which is only visible if I have my hair up.
This being said, I don't have my tattoos to live up to the image of being tough or cool. All my tattoos represent a part of who I am - therefore I would feel personally offended if somebody asked me to remove them. Luckily enough, I'm not in the police force
watch out this chick has tough stickers lol just kidding, my gf has a half sleeve she's a pen pusher ( office worker) she has to have them covered at all times, good for me not as many guys going in for the i like your tats quote lol
Also laser removal of tats looks wrong it's just burning the inked skin.
Fuscus
Almost Legendary
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2003
- Messages
- 7,897
- Reaction score
- 5
You got stats to back this up?
your original post
states that the "police cant actually catch/charge anyone with serious crimes" which is clearly not true and needs a reality check
I stand by my statement, which if you read properly does not encompass all tattooed people. Most ( but not all ) of the boring and derivative tattoos, hearts, flowers are stencilled. The average female who goes in to get her "slag tag" does not produce a personal detailed design, instead she leafs though a design book or (occasionally) brings in one downloaded from the web. Same for the bloke wanting an AC/DC, skull or Harley tattoo. Personally, I think that if you were going to get a tattoo a stencil at least avoids misspellings like
Occasionally you do see an amazing tattoo but how many are amazing works of art like this:
you forgot my category - exceptionally cute
Though any of your choices work for me
You are allowed.
I found the ABR, it only talks about where you're not allowed to get a tattoo and what happens if you get one in those places. It says nothing about getting permission to get tattoos anywhere.
So by the book, I'm not wrong and after a discussion with our coxswain (naval police), you can only be charged if the tattoo affects your ability to work (during the healing proccess). You can be charged for being sunburnt but only if it affects your ability to work.
I will post what it says when I get home and have a keyboard to type it all lol.
Aussie-Pride
Well-Known Member
lol "slag tag" I like it. I have " your name" on my **** cheeks so I can tell people I have their name on my **** lol i also have my family my friends down my left rib cage under and under my right arm on my ribs i have "be who you are say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind" are these acceptable or would these be classed as slag tags? lol
Last edited:
TigerCoastal
Well-Known Member
Tatt's arent everyones cup of tea, i have missed out on getting jobs due to the ink that i have. I dont cover them up for no-one, even if they are offended as the tatts are a part of me, accept me accept my tatts. With an attitude like this i know i am not doing myself any favors, but i am not a bikie or drug user, i work 60+hr weeks, so why shouldnt I be able to enjoy what I like? This is the problem with the world today, everyone is to worried about what the next person is doing, instead of looking at themselves.
They tried something similar where i currently work (due to a sexual misconduct complaint about one of my tatts) and tried to make people cover their tatts. I work in a factory with 800 other people and around 15-20 were effected by this. All that was needed to say was one word and they back peddled. HARASSMENT. If you make one person wear long sleeves, ALL must wear them regardless of if they have tatts or not, other wise you are bullying a minority......
They tried something similar where i currently work (due to a sexual misconduct complaint about one of my tatts) and tried to make people cover their tatts. I work in a factory with 800 other people and around 15-20 were effected by this. All that was needed to say was one word and they back peddled. HARASSMENT. If you make one person wear long sleeves, ALL must wear them regardless of if they have tatts or not, other wise you are bullying a minority......
For those interested, here's the refference from the ABR the defence uses as a guide for what is and isn't an acceptable tattoo in the RAN (Royal Australian Navy).
Directly quoted from ABR 81 (manual for dress and conduct)
"Tattoos
5.17 RAN personnel are not permitted to have tattoos or brands on their face, scalp, ears or neck (generically referred to as facial tattoos) that would be visible when wearing an open necked, collared shirt. If for religious or cultural reasons, personnel are required to obtain such a tattoo or brand, a waiver is to be sought from Director General Navy People (DGNP). Serving personnel who obtain facial tattoo are to be assessed by their Commanding Officer(CO), with a recommendation being passed to DGNP for a decision regarding their future employment. Socially unacceptable tattoos or brands, that include indecent, offensive, racist or sexist themes are prohibited. "
Directly quoted from ABR 81 (manual for dress and conduct)
"Tattoos
5.17 RAN personnel are not permitted to have tattoos or brands on their face, scalp, ears or neck (generically referred to as facial tattoos) that would be visible when wearing an open necked, collared shirt. If for religious or cultural reasons, personnel are required to obtain such a tattoo or brand, a waiver is to be sought from Director General Navy People (DGNP). Serving personnel who obtain facial tattoo are to be assessed by their Commanding Officer(CO), with a recommendation being passed to DGNP for a decision regarding their future employment. Socially unacceptable tattoos or brands, that include indecent, offensive, racist or sexist themes are prohibited. "
saximus
Almost Legendary
Well said.
I've never understood the mentality of some of the people in this thread. Fair enough some people with tatts and other body mods are criminals or "bad" people but there are plenty of people without them that are bad too.
If you meet someone who is a kind, generous person and who you get along with perfectly well and instantly like, would your perception of that person change if you found out they have a skull tattooed on their arm? If so, why? Why does the choice to change something about their own body make someone less worthy or respect?
This goes for a job like being a cop then too. If a person is diligent and hard-working and is the best candidate for the job, do those traits instantly disappear because they have some ink on them?
I'd be really interested to hear from the tattoo haters with valid reasons other than "I saw a guy once who wasn't very nice and he had a tat"
Ramsayi
Very Well-Known Member
Who are some of the people in this thread? I can only find one who has expressed a negative opinion to tatts. :?
And 75% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Just because a majority of people do not have a tatt does not mean that they do not generally accept other people having one. The issue is really about how to you definitively regulate what is considered an 'offensive' tatt. I am a school teacher and know plenty of teachers who have visible tatts (mine is on my chest so not an issue) but none of them look at the job and say 'Gee how cool would it be if I had a tatt of a bong or a naked woman that my students can all look at.'
They want to address the issue of the overall image of the police force and have grabbed a knee jerk approach to the issue. If they want to raise the image of the force they hould address the number of police serving so rural communities aren't under staffed or so that hot spot areas with violent crime can be more effectively patroled etc and maybe not make the police seem like revenue raisers with the flash for cash speed checks etc. I know a number of cops and they are good blokes and gals trying to do their jobs.
And Fuscus that really is a narrow minded comment. Some people get the drunken spur of the moment tat but many people especially these days think long and hard about their design because they want something with some detail and artistic merit or a deeper personal meaning. My wife and I got ours a few years ago (I was 40) after months of thought and searching and stone cold sober, to commorate the baby boy we lost and burried two years earlier. I will be getting one more for both of my surviving children in the near future. Judging us for our tatts is like judging me for being a dirt bike rider or for being a teacher.
I will now don my flame suit and wait for the impending backlash.
Last edited:
TigerCoastal
Well-Known Member
Any respectable and decent tattoo artist wont give you a tatt if you have been drinking, and if you have any respect for yourself you will use one of these artists as they tend to have the better hygene practices in place. If you rule out the risk of disease transmittal there is still downfalls. I've had backyard ink done, supplying ALL of my own consumables (needles, ink cups, tubes, etc) and have had the ability to drink while getting one done, and i bled like a stuck pig! And due to the excess bleeding the ink got flushed back out in large patches leaving me a major re-color, and from that day i only pay top $$$ for my ink, from a great artist (and a**hole)
I had a mate in the Army years ago who was stung by scorpions on bivowac (sp?) and was really ill and hospitalised. He went on to get a scorpion tattooed on his shoulder near one of the stings, he was serving at the time and required no permission.
I also know a lady who currently teaches on the central north coast who was a police officer and because of her ink was succesfully used as an undercover drug ops cop as the ink gave her 'cred' she was even encouraged when she wanted more. Her ink included a sleeve and significant calf work visible while wearing female dress uniforms.
I don't think it should really be as big an issue as the media are making it, just to come back to the original point of this thread. Take a leaf out of the Defense Forces handbook and move on, then address some of the bigger issues the voters are voicing like police staffing numbers and response/patrol stats.
That is all fair enough and I certainly went to great lengths to suss out my studio and even the artist who did our work as I wanted someone who could do fine detail and not make it look like old school navy or prison ink. That doesn't change the fact that drunken tatts happen, my original post was pointing out that these are really becoming the minority of ink you see done these days, where as back in the 70's it was common practice. Also it is interesting to look around certain areas. I spent Christmas in Logan (Woodridge/Kingston) in Qld and it seemed like people without tatts were in the minority.
It certainly is a life choice that has gained in popularity and many 'professionals' now have tatts, but they also tend to use discression choosing what they get and where and most (imho) that I have noticed have them in places covered by the clothes they wear for daily work.
I also know a lady who currently teaches on the central north coast who was a police officer and because of her ink was succesfully used as an undercover drug ops cop as the ink gave her 'cred' she was even encouraged when she wanted more. Her ink included a sleeve and significant calf work visible while wearing female dress uniforms.
I don't think it should really be as big an issue as the media are making it, just to come back to the original point of this thread. Take a leaf out of the Defense Forces handbook and move on, then address some of the bigger issues the voters are voicing like police staffing numbers and response/patrol stats.
Any respectable and decent tattoo artist wont give you a tatt if you have been drinking, and if you have any respect for yourself you will use one of these artists as they tend to have the better hygene practices in place. If you rule out the risk of disease transmittal there is still downfalls. I've had backyard ink done, supplying ALL of my own consumables (needles, ink cups, tubes, etc) and have had the ability to drink while getting one done, and i bled like a stuck pig! And due to the excess bleeding the ink got flushed back out in large patches leaving me a major re-color, and from that day i only pay top $$$ for my ink, from a great artist (and a**hole)
That is all fair enough and I certainly went to great lengths to suss out my studio and even the artist who did our work as I wanted someone who could do fine detail and not make it look like old school navy or prison ink. That doesn't change the fact that drunken tatts happen, my original post was pointing out that these are really becoming the minority of ink you see done these days, where as back in the 70's it was common practice. Also it is interesting to look around certain areas. I spent Christmas in Logan (Woodridge/Kingston) in Qld and it seemed like people without tatts were in the minority.
It certainly is a life choice that has gained in popularity and many 'professionals' now have tatts, but they also tend to use discression choosing what they get and where and most (imho) that I have noticed have them in places covered by the clothes they wear for daily work.
Last edited:
S
Snowman
Guest
Body art is so last decade anyway. Cool people are getting them removed rather than added.
Ramsayi
Very Well-Known Member
This is the point though,if tats were/are as acceptable as some seem to think then why would a person feel the need to have them covered?
Aussie-Pride
Well-Known Member
I never plan on being a copper so it doesn't worry me just another upside of being a tradie.
It is just an observation. I keep mine covered because of the conservative way in which teachers are percieved and the fact that many of the principals I have worked under are from an older generation who have different views to most of the other people I deal with on a day by day basis, and so as to avoid unnessecary crap with narrow minded people, but mostly because I got mine for private and personal reasons NOT to show off that I have one. More and more of the teachers I know who have tatts these days are happy to have them on show but choose designs that won't provoke reactions in people.
- Status
