2
2
0
One of the most hyped changes that was supposed to be coming was shaving while off duty even during leave. However, after reading the regulation I found that this part was rumor. The regulation states:
Males will keep their face clean-shaven when in uniform, or in civilian clothes ON DUTY.
That was pretty much all it stated on the case. Maybe I missed something somewhere else in the regulation!?!
What are your thoughts? What about other possible discrepancies?
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 4
2
2
0
I don't think it was part of the rumor mill concerning the whole shaving thing, I just believe someone took a look at it and decided that 1) made absolutely no sense and 2) how would you be able to enforce it when a Soldier is on leave. From what I have seen of the leaders slide deck, it was nice to see some of the hairstyles addressed and made clearer so that personnel can understand them better and leaders can enforce them better.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
That is a great point. Sometimes I forget that even common sense can prevail, no matter how rare it can be.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The biggest discrepancy that I have seen in the new 670-1 is the tattoo policy. The part about tattoos below the elbows and knees is already causing big debate among my peers. The debate is this. Firstly, it states that they will be grand fathered for sleeves and tattoos that measure less than 5 inches in diameter. Then it states that sleeves are no longer authorized after the initial documenting of tattoos and that you may have no more than 4 of the 5 inch diameter tattoos below the elbow and knee. Half of us read this as, you may have the 4 tattoos, period, even after the documentation. Meaning that if you had 1 on your right forearm, 1 on your left forearm and 1 on your right calf, you could still get 1 more on your left calf. That would max you out on below the elbow and knee tats. The other half thinks it means if you have any, they will be grandfathered and you can't get any more after documentation regardless of how few you have. That would defeat the concept of grandfathering them at all. Why even put anything about the 4 tattoos in there? Any thoughts on this?
(1)
(0)
MSG Giovani DeJesus
SFC Smith, I was just thinking about this same issue. This was suppose to clear up issues that we had prior to the update and it seems like it created more confusion/grey area/up to interpretation situations. I hate being put in those situations when a Soldier asks for clarification on something and I'm not able to clarify it because it hasn't been clearly identified.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google