To be even blunter: It's difficult to overstate the importance more senior officers (the ones who determine the utilization and fate of junior officers) place on compliance with organizational norms. This is especially important when it comes to dress and appearance, because anything less than 100% compliance with letter **and spirit** of those norms is generally regarded as the first place where rebellious behavior--and therefore untrustworthiness and unreliability--starts. The typical response to that reality by people who want "tats"--and who want others to know that they have them--is, "so what if I have one (or two...)--they're completely legal." That misses the point. That something is "legal" doesn't mean it's appropriate to do it. That's where maturity and "situational awareness" have to come into play. You also hear lots of whiny, "but 'tats' don't affect how I do my job." A HUGE part of the job is professionalism.
New Tattoo
- Thread starter FutureFalcon
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 383
some specifics
Hi, I just read the whole thread. I am +1 on Pima, Bullet and CC.
Dear OP (and anyone else considering this): when our son signed his paperwork for USNA in preparation for I-day there was a tatoo form (he does not have any). As a matter of fact it also stated that he should not get any as it is considering "defacing." (He signed his name on this paper stating he would not get a tatoo if I remember correctly).
In any case, my husband and his friends used to say they could not get tatoos (at USNA or later as commissioned officers) because it is "defacing 'federal property'" they knew it was that serious.
Well, the regulations are clear: if someone has a pre-existing tatoo, it cannot be visible in regulation swim gear...period. That means for females a one piece conservative swim suit, for males rather short swim trunks (not the super long swim shorts kids wear these days). If it shows in swim gear and if your tatoo shows in uniform...this could spell trouble. Contact DodMerb and report it right away, they will know what to tell you now...after the fact. Good luck to the OP. Let us know how it goes! Still curious but I guess you won't tell us as it will identify you further: what did you get permanently inked onto your skin?
Hi, I just read the whole thread. I am +1 on Pima, Bullet and CC.
Dear OP (and anyone else considering this): when our son signed his paperwork for USNA in preparation for I-day there was a tatoo form (he does not have any). As a matter of fact it also stated that he should not get any as it is considering "defacing." (He signed his name on this paper stating he would not get a tatoo if I remember correctly).
In any case, my husband and his friends used to say they could not get tatoos (at USNA or later as commissioned officers) because it is "defacing 'federal property'" they knew it was that serious.
Well, the regulations are clear: if someone has a pre-existing tatoo, it cannot be visible in regulation swim gear...period. That means for females a one piece conservative swim suit, for males rather short swim trunks (not the super long swim shorts kids wear these days). If it shows in swim gear and if your tatoo shows in uniform...this could spell trouble. Contact DodMerb and report it right away, they will know what to tell you now...after the fact. Good luck to the OP. Let us know how it goes! Still curious but I guess you won't tell us as it will identify you further: what did you get permanently inked onto your skin?
Last edited:
Time to undo old wive's tales
Cadets' and midshipmens' bodies are not "government property." Getting tattoos may be dumb, but it's not "defacing government property."
Each Service's and Service Academy's rules are unique to that academy. DoD and statutory rules are the only ones that apply to all Aervice Academies across the board; there are no such overarching rules regarding tattoos.
Cadets' and midshipmens' bodies are not "government property." Getting tattoos may be dumb, but it's not "defacing government property."
Each Service's and Service Academy's rules are unique to that academy. DoD and statutory rules are the only ones that apply to all Aervice Academies across the board; there are no such overarching rules regarding tattoos.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
As stated earlier the OP has done it, all they can do now is get it cleared by the authorities.
For 16, DON'T DO IT!
I think it is important to stress this.
As I stated earlier this has become a thread on at least 3 forums with this site.
Overwhelmingly everyone has stated for various reasons why you shouldn't. I have not seen one thread where posters say go for it.
1. Medical issue if it doesn't heal correctly.
~~~ An 18 yo lives on trust that the tat artist is as hygenic as they state. As a woman, I can tell you that you feel the same way about manicurists before you get a nail infection.
2. Design
~~~ Most candidates/appointees want to mark this honor. Problem is only 75-80% will make it to commissioning. How will you like looking at your body for the rest of your life reminding you that you were not one of the 75-80%?
3. Age
~~~Posters that are saying OMG DON'T are in their 40's+ they are looking at their own body and realizing skin sags, crinkles and wrinkles. It won't be pretty at 50...aka TPG and Tweety becoming Big Bird.
4. Image
~~~ AF is known as the corporate branch. They take the heat constantly from their sister services for banker's hours, etc. The corporate world doesn't look positively on a CEO with a tat.
~~~ When the new regs came down re:tats, I believe it was 99-00, the AF didn't have an issue compared to other branches. Body piercing was more of an issue (belly and tongue piercing). It has never been popular with the AF to get a tat.
~~~Tats have now a negative image in the military because of the regs currently.
It is your decision. It is your body, and your right to do whatever you want to it, BUT it is also your peers right to feel their way re: anyone who does get a tat. Every action in your life will have a reaction. You need to think about not the action, but your action after the reaction.
Finally, this is off topic, but kind of on topic. Just like getting tats and the action/reaction issue re:AFA, you need to realize that these forums are not as private as you may believe.
BCT is known to break the cadet so they can build them back up. Don't fool yourself, if you are the only one with a tat that they can see, it is an easy way to remember your name. You never want to be on their radar. 5'11" from CA with brown hair is one thing. 5'11" with brown hair from CA and a tat of the AF logo is another.
I can hear them now, screaming at them for thinking they deserve to have that AF logo on their body. It has nothing to do with the fact they have a tat, everything to do with the AF logo.
Give me a tat design, and I can give you how they will get ribbed for it. You want to make sure you do not give them any ammunition to highlight you.
Again, your career will never be in jeopardy if you have one, your ability to perform will dictate your success. HOWEVER, image is a factor, and you need to understand that the military is not our current society. They live by a different code, they live differently, where your colleagues are your circle of life, at sometimes more than your family.
For 16, DON'T DO IT!
I think it is important to stress this.
As I stated earlier this has become a thread on at least 3 forums with this site.
Overwhelmingly everyone has stated for various reasons why you shouldn't. I have not seen one thread where posters say go for it.
1. Medical issue if it doesn't heal correctly.
~~~ An 18 yo lives on trust that the tat artist is as hygenic as they state. As a woman, I can tell you that you feel the same way about manicurists before you get a nail infection.
2. Design
~~~ Most candidates/appointees want to mark this honor. Problem is only 75-80% will make it to commissioning. How will you like looking at your body for the rest of your life reminding you that you were not one of the 75-80%?
3. Age
~~~Posters that are saying OMG DON'T are in their 40's+ they are looking at their own body and realizing skin sags, crinkles and wrinkles. It won't be pretty at 50...aka TPG and Tweety becoming Big Bird.
4. Image
~~~ AF is known as the corporate branch. They take the heat constantly from their sister services for banker's hours, etc. The corporate world doesn't look positively on a CEO with a tat.
~~~ When the new regs came down re:tats, I believe it was 99-00, the AF didn't have an issue compared to other branches. Body piercing was more of an issue (belly and tongue piercing). It has never been popular with the AF to get a tat.
~~~Tats have now a negative image in the military because of the regs currently.
It is your decision. It is your body, and your right to do whatever you want to it, BUT it is also your peers right to feel their way re: anyone who does get a tat. Every action in your life will have a reaction. You need to think about not the action, but your action after the reaction.
Finally, this is off topic, but kind of on topic. Just like getting tats and the action/reaction issue re:AFA, you need to realize that these forums are not as private as you may believe.
BCT is known to break the cadet so they can build them back up. Don't fool yourself, if you are the only one with a tat that they can see, it is an easy way to remember your name. You never want to be on their radar. 5'11" from CA with brown hair is one thing. 5'11" with brown hair from CA and a tat of the AF logo is another.
I can hear them now, screaming at them for thinking they deserve to have that AF logo on their body. It has nothing to do with the fact they have a tat, everything to do with the AF logo.
Give me a tat design, and I can give you how they will get ribbed for it. You want to make sure you do not give them any ammunition to highlight you.
Again, your career will never be in jeopardy if you have one, your ability to perform will dictate your success. HOWEVER, image is a factor, and you need to understand that the military is not our current society. They live by a different code, they live differently, where your colleagues are your circle of life, at sometimes more than your family.
Last edited:
What I meant was that I was going to get the tattoo after I get in as in after I graduate, if I still want it. I already have one tattoo, but I got that while I was in my enlisted tech school. As I said in my post, the guys who had tattoos already at enlisted basic heard about it for the first few weeks. Mama's boy heard about it for the whole time.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
jwalsh, I think the key word is "if".
For someone who has a tat to say "IF" makes me question why they didn't say WHEN. Are there already doubts and looming regrets of getting a tat?
Again, there is a difference when you are 24 and when you are 18. I think that is what everyone is trying to emphasize. How in time you may feel differently.
I would think if you feel it is not an issue in the AF life, getting another would not be an issue if it followed regs, unless you feel that the 1st somehow was a regret.
Let's all remember there are rules and regulations. You are not going to see women wearing their hair down past their shoulders. It is something you sign off on when you sign on.
For someone who has a tat to say "IF" makes me question why they didn't say WHEN. Are there already doubts and looming regrets of getting a tat?
Again, there is a difference when you are 24 and when you are 18. I think that is what everyone is trying to emphasize. How in time you may feel differently.
I would think if you feel it is not an issue in the AF life, getting another would not be an issue if it followed regs, unless you feel that the 1st somehow was a regret.
Let's all remember there are rules and regulations. You are not going to see women wearing their hair down past their shoulders. It is something you sign off on when you sign on.
Christcorp
15-Year Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,382
It's already been eluded to a couple of times, but for those who haven't gotten a tattoo yet, you should reconsider. At least until you've actually gotten into the military and can "Test the Water" for yourself.
There are some that will talk about rights, regulations, your body, discreet, etc... Well, let's talk REAL WORLD and not regulations. Huh!!! Am I saying that regulations and rules aren't the "Real World". I'm telling you what is SUPPOSE to be, and what IS, are two different things. If a person walks into a job interview with body piercings and tattoos, will the person doing the interview probably develop a preconceived first impression? Yes they will. Should they? That isn't important. What is important is that they WILL. Can/will an employer turn a person down for a job because they have a tattoo or body piercings? Nope; they can't. But can that body piercing or tattoo have the interviewer say to them self: "I don't want that person's first impression to our customers to be that appearance. I'm not going to hire them". YUP!!! This happens all the time. They might not admit that they didn't offer the job to the individual with the tattoos or body piercings, but they very well could have. And THAT IS REALITY. Forget what the "Rules Say". You can prove they are prejudice, so you just live with it. And many individuals with pronounced piercings or tattoos accept this. They know darn well that being a lawyer, and arguing a case in court, with a 1" ring hole in their ear and tattoos on their forehead will prejudice the jury and judge. Let alone clients looking for a lawyer. So most people who get these alterations don't become lawyer.
Well; just because the rule in the military says it can't be seen, and that's all you have to worry about, doesn't mean that is "Real Life". Legally, they might not be able to kick you out because you have a tattoo on the cheek of your butt, but if your superiors know about it, that doesn't mean that they may not allow you the EXACT SAME UNBIASED OPPORTUNITIES as your peers. And there's no way you're going to prove they are prejudice. That's "real world".
Now; once you're out of the academy, you're not taking group showers, you have complete privacy in your own apartment/house when you're getting dressed; and basically, you can keep a tattoo to yourself if you choose...... Then that is a totally different scenario. But whether or not it's Legal or "In Regs" is not the entire story. For at least the 4 years at the academy, you're going to be seen by everyone in numerous conditions. You're not going to hide a tattoo. What prejudices come of it..... you can't really say.
That's why i recommend waiting until you're at the academy or even later. You can judge the attitudes and tolerance level of those above you. Again; I'm not talking about what the rules and regs say. Believe it or not, that isn't all there is. Sorry if that doesn't sound fair, but that's REAL LIFE. it happens in the civilian world as well as the military. I would definitely think about this before you go and do it. A guy piercing an ear is one thing. You pull out the earring, and no one knows. "Unless it's one of those metal HOLES". But other piercings and tattoos can't always be hidden. Think about it.
There are some that will talk about rights, regulations, your body, discreet, etc... Well, let's talk REAL WORLD and not regulations. Huh!!! Am I saying that regulations and rules aren't the "Real World". I'm telling you what is SUPPOSE to be, and what IS, are two different things. If a person walks into a job interview with body piercings and tattoos, will the person doing the interview probably develop a preconceived first impression? Yes they will. Should they? That isn't important. What is important is that they WILL. Can/will an employer turn a person down for a job because they have a tattoo or body piercings? Nope; they can't. But can that body piercing or tattoo have the interviewer say to them self: "I don't want that person's first impression to our customers to be that appearance. I'm not going to hire them". YUP!!! This happens all the time. They might not admit that they didn't offer the job to the individual with the tattoos or body piercings, but they very well could have. And THAT IS REALITY. Forget what the "Rules Say". You can prove they are prejudice, so you just live with it. And many individuals with pronounced piercings or tattoos accept this. They know darn well that being a lawyer, and arguing a case in court, with a 1" ring hole in their ear and tattoos on their forehead will prejudice the jury and judge. Let alone clients looking for a lawyer. So most people who get these alterations don't become lawyer.
Well; just because the rule in the military says it can't be seen, and that's all you have to worry about, doesn't mean that is "Real Life". Legally, they might not be able to kick you out because you have a tattoo on the cheek of your butt, but if your superiors know about it, that doesn't mean that they may not allow you the EXACT SAME UNBIASED OPPORTUNITIES as your peers. And there's no way you're going to prove they are prejudice. That's "real world".
Now; once you're out of the academy, you're not taking group showers, you have complete privacy in your own apartment/house when you're getting dressed; and basically, you can keep a tattoo to yourself if you choose...... Then that is a totally different scenario. But whether or not it's Legal or "In Regs" is not the entire story. For at least the 4 years at the academy, you're going to be seen by everyone in numerous conditions. You're not going to hide a tattoo. What prejudices come of it..... you can't really say.
That's why i recommend waiting until you're at the academy or even later. You can judge the attitudes and tolerance level of those above you. Again; I'm not talking about what the rules and regs say. Believe it or not, that isn't all there is. Sorry if that doesn't sound fair, but that's REAL LIFE. it happens in the civilian world as well as the military. I would definitely think about this before you go and do it. A guy piercing an ear is one thing. You pull out the earring, and no one knows. "Unless it's one of those metal HOLES". But other piercings and tattoos can't always be hidden. Think about it.
CC hits this one on the head… It’s basically the Halo (no not the video game!) effect or in this case reverse halo effect where individuals, brands or other things judged to have a single undesirable trait (tattoo in our discussion) are subsequently judged to have many poor traits, allowing a single weak point or negative trait to influence others' perception of the person, brand or other thing in general.
I’m not saying it’s right it’s just the way it is… Do I have one yes I do but I didn’t get one until my late 30s and I debated it for YEARS before I got one, and not only what I should get but where as well. Pima is also right 16 is not an age to get one… your beliefs (not just religious but social and intellectual) will change so much in your early to mid 20s that the reasons why you got the tattoo at 16 may not mean so much to you anymore.
I’m not saying it’s right it’s just the way it is… Do I have one yes I do but I didn’t get one until my late 30s and I debated it for YEARS before I got one, and not only what I should get but where as well. Pima is also right 16 is not an age to get one… your beliefs (not just religious but social and intellectual) will change so much in your early to mid 20s that the reasons why you got the tattoo at 16 may not mean so much to you anymore.
It's obvious from most of this thread that the services are destined to keep getting lower and lower quality academy grads because they will get lower and lower quality kids whose focus appears to be not on what they can contribute but on what they can get away with. Get the damned "tat" so you can learn about consequences the direct way.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
I think the bush has been beaten dead by this point.
Nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing anyone posts will change any posters mind on this issue. They have their path to live, and it is their path.
The only thing left is to respect their decision/position, and for them to respect the position of those that disagree.
The only thing I care about is that just like anything in life you research how it will impact you.
OBTW legally you can't get a tat until you are 18...that is also why many candidates, appointees, cadets and military members are in the OMG mode.
I think more people are up in arms because this yr was a belt tightening yr with less apptmts. They are viewing this as "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?, YOU RISKED A MEDICAL DQ FOR A TAT?" Many TWE were sent, and it can be viewed as being non-chalant in your attitude by risking a medical DQ, while their dreams were crushed. No fault of your own re: them with the TWE, but def. I get how could you risk it, do you not realize you were blessed? It appears to them as a shake their head in disbelief moment.
3 YRS ago when we went through the process everyone posted to us "wrap your DS in bubble wrap"...he opted ROTC. I say that every time I post when someone states we got AFA or AFROTC, because I darn well know, one injury, one medical issue and they could be facing medical turnback at best and DQ at worst.
That is also why you see posters that have been here for yrs, or cadets that are now officers state don't risk it. They get it. That DodMERB exam you took will not be the last, for your entire career you will go through a short and long exam, long includes everything you did now and starting AD it even will check cholesterol.
The OP was lucky not to have an infection. For class of 16, ask yourself do you want to risk the appointment? Do you want to get to I day and as they review your records, DQ because it is 1/8th of an inch off? Is that tat worth it?
You know I am laughing right now because the military has not changed since the 80's when a classic film came out. It was called An Officer and A Gentlemen. Richard Gere tried to hide his tat. Isn't that what is occurring now? If you have to hide it, than you should ask why you have it! JMPO, but shouldn't you want the world to see it? Why not? Why pay the money to hide it for only you to see it? Again, JMPO!
Nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing anyone posts will change any posters mind on this issue. They have their path to live, and it is their path.
The only thing left is to respect their decision/position, and for them to respect the position of those that disagree.
The only thing I care about is that just like anything in life you research how it will impact you.
OBTW legally you can't get a tat until you are 18...that is also why many candidates, appointees, cadets and military members are in the OMG mode.
I think more people are up in arms because this yr was a belt tightening yr with less apptmts. They are viewing this as "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?, YOU RISKED A MEDICAL DQ FOR A TAT?" Many TWE were sent, and it can be viewed as being non-chalant in your attitude by risking a medical DQ, while their dreams were crushed. No fault of your own re: them with the TWE, but def. I get how could you risk it, do you not realize you were blessed? It appears to them as a shake their head in disbelief moment.
3 YRS ago when we went through the process everyone posted to us "wrap your DS in bubble wrap"...he opted ROTC. I say that every time I post when someone states we got AFA or AFROTC, because I darn well know, one injury, one medical issue and they could be facing medical turnback at best and DQ at worst.
That is also why you see posters that have been here for yrs, or cadets that are now officers state don't risk it. They get it. That DodMERB exam you took will not be the last, for your entire career you will go through a short and long exam, long includes everything you did now and starting AD it even will check cholesterol.
The OP was lucky not to have an infection. For class of 16, ask yourself do you want to risk the appointment? Do you want to get to I day and as they review your records, DQ because it is 1/8th of an inch off? Is that tat worth it?
You know I am laughing right now because the military has not changed since the 80's when a classic film came out. It was called An Officer and A Gentlemen. Richard Gere tried to hide his tat. Isn't that what is occurring now? If you have to hide it, than you should ask why you have it! JMPO, but shouldn't you want the world to see it? Why not? Why pay the money to hide it for only you to see it? Again, JMPO!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 383
Cadets' and midshipmens' bodies are not "government property." Getting tattoos may be dumb, but it's not "defacing government property."
Each Service's and Service Academy's rules are unique to that academy. DoD and statutory rules are the only ones that apply to all Aervice Academies across the board; there are no such overarching rules regarding tattoos.
Agreed! I was merely quoting my husband and his friends, the had a smile on their face when they said that. Of course, their bodies are not government property...sorry if I offended. It was a statement of how seriously they took the "don't get tatoos" idea.
FutureFalcon
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 4
Wow! Just because I decide to express myself and I beliefs on my body does not mean that I am of lower quality kid than one who does not have a tattoo. I am not saying that I have a tattoo on my face that whoever sees me will be able to notice it. I clearly said within Academy regulations, meaning not visible in any uniform including PT gear. In a professional environment (i.e. job interview, Nobody will notice it). Yes it is a risk but it is a risk that I was willing to take. Doesn't mean that I am dumb. One's opinion on tattoo could be different than the next person; doesn't give you the right to judge me on the quality of cadet that I am based on a decision that I made about getting a tattoo.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 6,197
I'm feeling generous tonight...
I think your comment here, while a simple expression (I am going to assume) of your opinion, paints with such a large brush that it really IMHO borders upon insulting and attacking to the original poster who set out to receive opinions about an issue he was concerned about.
Tattoo's have a long and colorful history in the armed forces and in society in general. And there are prejudices toward them, as well as exhiliration when getting one!
Both opinions are fine; but to start prejudging people simply based upon a statement about a tattoo or others comments...that starts to get perilously close to the line here.
I'd ask that, with this type opinion, you keep it to yourself. If you feel you absolutely must express it, try a PM to the poster. Your point will be made, a discussion may ensue, but it won't paint with the broad brush and potentially open you up to forum sanctions, and stifle a good, honest discussion.
Just my 63 cents worth.
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
**And in this case, MODERATOR too...**
Farleigh85
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2010
- Messages
- 60
Anyone who submits a post on these forums seeking the opinions of others as to whether getting a tat is a good idea should not be surprised to get exactly what they ask for. Posters of my generation tend to have strong, overwhelmingly negative opinions of tats. We can be accused of being bigots all day long and we're likely to remain serenely comfortable in our opinions. Don't expect us to gush and say, "Why, what a wonderful tat! I wouldn't wear one, but I MUST embrace and celebrate your decision to wear one!" Ain't going to happen.
Apparently, people of your generation tend to think that body graffiti is a wonderful thing. When the selection and promotion boards are filled with tat wearers, i.e., men and women of your generation, you should be home free. But in the interim you're going to have to contend with the firmly set opinions of the old-timers who dominate the boards.
But you're right. Having a tat does not necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the character of the person wearing the tat. I am sure there have been more than a few Medals of Honor awarded to tat-wearers. On the other hand, some of us tend to see a tat as evidence of impulsiveness and immaturity, a decision to record permanently on one's skin a decision made without a full and careful weighing of the long-term consequences.
In my opinion, choosing to wear a tat that is discrete (as is your intention) and does not scream "Look at me! I'm cool and trendy! I have a tat!" does show some wisdom and forethought on your part. You are carefully walking a fine line between strongly contentious points of view. Good luck.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2011
- Messages
- 205
He asks for positive help.
Can you all just give that to him? Stop bashing. He got a tattoo, thousands of soldiers do. Who cares? Unless it was a big FU that we can see across his forehead.
He started this post asking whether or not his tattoo would be a DQ and if he would have to report it...
Anyway, FutureFalcon, I would call DoDMERB just to tell them you got it. It is not going to disqualify you (unless you caught some disease).
He didn't ask whether it was a good idea to get a tattoo or not. He clearly stated that he had gotten one and whether he should report it or not. Report it, don't worry. I'm certain that having a tattoo will in no regards affect your standing.
I think it's obvious that you are very pretentious and nonsensical. A tattoo doesn't make a person. Just because someone wants/has a tattoo doesn't lower the quality of a person.
Just an FYI, i know plenty of servicemen and women that have tattoos that range from enlisted and officer ranks. Please step down from that high horse and stop judging people. I think the quality of MY Air Force or any of the other branches will begin to degrade if admissions boards/people judge based on trivial things like this. Some people may do so, but not everyone is quite as narrow minded. If someone has the intelligence/skills/etc to backup what they're doing, what they look like or whatever else they could be judged on doesn't really matter too much.
If it's not visible in uniform (or is less than 25% of the exposed body part), it's not gang related, and it's not offensive it's in regulation. That's that.
Read AFI 36-2903.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 6,197
Folks...I think we're quickly reaching the end of usefullness to this thread.
I'm going to leave it open, for now...but please start to ratchet it down...I think the general question of the OP has been answered. Now it appears we're starting to head toward confrontation regarding "opinions" of tattoo's and such and that's when we will cross the line of "value" to the forum.
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
Moderator
I'm going to leave it open, for now...but please start to ratchet it down...I think the general question of the OP has been answered. Now it appears we're starting to head toward confrontation regarding "opinions" of tattoo's and such and that's when we will cross the line of "value" to the forum.
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
Moderator
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Messages
- 6,197
Steve,
On a more important note:
I'm just curious as to how your opinion is worth $0.63, while mine is only worth $0.02?
Mod privilege?
Nahh....
Driver versus Passenger...
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
hornetguy
15-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 2,353
Nahh....
Driver versus Passenger...
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
Remember, you can't launch boogers backward, but he can certainly launch them forward.