If you could remove one AR 670-1 regulation which would it be?

And I'd like to actually have hair but that's a sacrifice we have to make sometimes

I HATE having to get a fade every Sunday too I’d like to grow my hair out even if I do have to wear it in a bun. It would also keep us from sticking out so much in civies

I miss wearing my Mulitcam =/. I'll be glad to see the "universal" pattern get mothballed

Negative....what's with all hate towards tattoos? I mean until we get another CSM its not likley to change. Gotta learn to live with it.

I see nothing wrong with soldiers having tattoos. Just not on the neck.

personally I have no problem with tattoos I think we should be able to have whatever and wherever other then the face

lol there you go

For women too! LOL

Cause he cannot grow one. If it was worn during the horses days it should be reg now.

MAJ John Adams - while this may have been acceptable in the civil war era, it is not today. I've never been a fan of them and simply don't like them.

SGT Jon Creager - Your right. But just because I can't grow one, does not mean we should just let soldiers grow out their facial hair because they can. Why don't we worry about doing our job and not to see who can grow the coolest mustache. You're a civilian, you can grow what ever you like.

MSG Dan Castaneda - Now, are you pointing out General Burnside's mustache or his namesake sideburns? Seriously, though, I'm not a fan of those either. And frankly, the Army will function just fine whether the standard is to require full beards plaited with rings (gold for officers, silver for NCO, and anodized copper for other enlisted), or to shave everything above the collarbones to include eyebrows.
I'm mostly poking the bear with my recommendations concerning mustaches for cavalry units, but they ARE a cavalry tradition as well loved as neckerchiefs (they're OD now but they still give sovereign service against dust), Stetsons, and spurs. I've seen them very well and neatly done, even if they did push the envelope just a bit -- back in the mid 1970's. My own mustache was strictly by the book, just so you know.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, just as I am. The bottom line is maintenance of good order and discipline, whether that requires total body hair removal or removal of all regulations concerning hair.

Excellent post Sir! i would get on board for that.

LTC (Join to see) - Yeah, all those civilians who got gassed in the Tokyo subway thought their intel would provide them sufficient warning too.

That's an irrelevant counter-argument, since civilians have neither intelligence warnings for chemical attacks nor protective gear to counter them; even if known.

In a similar situation, very few units have chemical PPE at their immediate access: it's not issued at all, is stuck in an equipment locker that makes it inaccessible, or is "somewhere" amongst all the pro-gear that folks carry around but leave in their garages except for field events.

Given these realities, "shave bc you might have to put on a gas mask at any time" is an illogical argument. There are specific times we believe folks may have to use chemical PPE, and it's in those instances that a "no beards" rule is relevant.

LTC (Join to see) - I second you motion. Or if the threat is unknown but possible. Basically be allow neatly trimmed facial hair in garrison, clean shaven in the field/operational

Good luck telling the SF Support troops that.

SF support guy here. Theres at least in 1st group I only know 1 person who isn't Airborne and he just left for school. There's definitely more troops who aren't airborne at Bragg than there are in Group.

SGT (Join to see) - 7th Group is the same way. We had quite a few clerks in 4-25 HQ that didn't have wings but all of us line doggies did. It never made sense to me, a company of paratroopers graduates every week 49 times a year so you can't tell me there isn't enough qualified support staff to spread between the dozen AB Units left.