Is it ok for a warrant to get tattoos?

CW2 Stephen Pate — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 19:12:05 -0400

From what I've read it is fine, but to all of you out there, especially those in command positions, what are your thoughts?

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2016 7:21 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 19:21:40 -0400

Yep.......

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jun 6 at 2016 7:34 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 19:34:17 -0400

My take on tattoos has always been, as long as they can be covered up in professional dress (ie class B), have at it.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Jun 6 at 2016 7:46 PM

SN Greg Wright — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 19:46:41 -0400

I've never heard of any service differentiating tattoo 'privileges' based on rank. The Navy certainly doesn't. It's One Rule to Fit Them All.

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Jun 6 at 2016 8:12 PM

LTC Stephen C. — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 20:12:40 -0400

CW2 Stephen Pate, I never wanted one whether I was enlisted or commissioned, so I don't think I would have wanted one had I been a warrant officer. Tattoos are much in vogue now, but just not for me.

BTW, Maj John Bell, this was my response, way back when!

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Jun 6 at 2016 8:29 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 20:29:33 -0400

Your concern with getting a tattoo might be....what is allowed today under the regs, may be forbidden tomorrow. And while you may get grandfathered at a later date, there is no guarantee.

Response by SPC Brian Mason made Jun 6 at 2016 8:47 PM

SPC Brian Mason — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 20:47:49 -0400

As long as the soldier who is in a command position can effectively perform it, then the tattoos, with regard to what they are (Nazi, racist, etc., of course not) has no bearing on the person. I have four myself.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2016 9:19 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:19:45 -0400

I would rather see a tattoo, then this from an officer:

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Jun 6 at 2016 9:38 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:38:31 -0400

CW2 Stephen Pate Wait until COL Mikel J. Burroughs reads you post!

Be discreet, follow a conservative policy; policies change and squeeze where it hurts!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2016 9:46 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:46:29 -0400

As I am certain that the tattoo policy will cover Warrants as well, so I would have to say Yes, it is ok for Warrants to get tattoos.

Response by SA Jim Arnold made Jun 6 at 2016 10:21 PM

SA Jim Arnold — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:21:14 -0400

Ink is personal expression in a form of art.
I got my first tattoo in Spain, while serving.....though not an officer.

Response by Capt Michael Greene made Jun 6 at 2016 10:32 PM

Capt Michael Greene — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:32:58 -0400

Thinking back to my active duty days, it's a really individual decision, and a little bit problematic. Regs can change overnight. Your career always hinges on the quiet personal beliefs of your chain of command. I remember the day that the big admiral of the whole Navy signed a reg saying that facial hair was OK for all ranks. Then he personally called his staff together and told them to personally tell their staff, to personally tell THEIR staff...that anyone "who desires to be in a position of leadership" must not have facial hair. There are a whole lot of unwritten--and unspoken--rules, especially as you go higher in rank.

I have a rule: if you're questioning your decision, it might be a questionable decision.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 6 at 2016 11:59 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 23:59:45 -0400

Ink on Officers is like Mustaches on Officers.

I've never seen anything in any reg that expressly forbids either of them... but it's also rare as hell to see an O with either of them. It's one of the "isms" that don't seem to be done, like a (sub)cultural paux pas.

If you're going to get one, make sure it won't be seen in any working uniform (including PT gear) or any official photo. Unfortunately, books are judged by their covers.

Response by CW2 C.J. Scheurenbrand made Jun 7 at 2016 1:05 AM

CW2 C.J. Scheurenbrand — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 01:05:45 -0400

I'm not sure I fully understand what you are asking. AR 670-1 applies to all, no matter rank ,in terms of the tattoo portion. Are you asking is it against an unwritten rule or taboo? Either way it's your choice what to do with your body as long as in compliance. It cannot hinder any career progression if that's your worry. No board has a picture of you outside of your ASU's. There is nothing in the file with an asterisk denoting SM has a tattoo. But I would say if it's a worry to you that you feel the need to ask on here, a permanent decision like that might not be best for you right now, just my opinion.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 7 at 2016 2:57 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 02:57:06 -0400

Other than the on going regulation changes, tattoos are authorized.
Tattoos do not define your character or your leadership capability. They are a personal form of art or memory.
As far as command, most of my Soldiers are not aware I have tattoos; no ne know how many I have. I only have 1 that is visible in PTs - it's my military one. It is a personal choice. If you are that worried about it, no one has to know, it's not a conversation you have to have with Soldiers. But be sure you are within the current regulations, you cannot expect to tell others what to do if you are not complying with the standards (location and content).

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 7 at 2016 6:41 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 06:41:25 -0400

I can't speak to the feeling in the Army today, but I agree with the comparison with the mustache bias that was definitely there in the 70s and 80s. While clearly authorized by reg, it was looked on very negatively by senior officers if an officer had a mustache. There was a joke that the first screening promotion boards did was look at the photo and put all those with mustaches in the NO pile. So even officers with mustaches shaved them for their official photos. One CG (I. Think he was at Ft Hood) told his officers that he considered it an i tegrity violation if an officer had a mustache at Hood but not on their official file. It sounds ridiculous, but the taboo was that strong against officers having mustache, even though clearly authorized by reg.

I don't know if tattoos are treated the same way if they aren't seen while in uniform. But I would just suggest that it won't matter what the reg says. A bias can exist in spite of the regs. And maybe the WO community is different. But officer boards promote people in their own image.

Response by SrA Paul Pfeil made Jun 9 at 2016 12:02 PM

SrA Paul Pfeil — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 12:02:30 -0400

As long as it is within regulation why not

Response by SPC Nathaniel Femiano made Jun 10 at 2016 8:30 PM

SPC Nathaniel Femiano — Fri, 10 Jun 2016 20:30:45 -0400

I don't think he is asking for a policy confirmation. I believe he is asking about cultural acceptance within the warrant officer community. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Jun 14 at 2016 4:58 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 16:58:57 -0400

CW2 Stephen Pate I totally agree with the tattoos, as long as they are in the right places. I've had them while I Commanded at the Brigade Level twice and got one from my deployment. Since I've retired I've added some below the elbow. I had them where they couldn't be seen in any of my uniforms, but they could be after hours. Go for it Mr. Pate!

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 17 at 2016 9:04 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:04:42 -0400

What does having tattoos have to do with how effective a Warrant Officer I am? If you notice, none of my ink falls below my ASU cuff nor do they fall above my neckline. My command loves the job I am doing, the effect I have on Soldiers and Leaders. I am in a Bachelor's program for Space Studies. My Leaders are urged to take college. I believe that we have more pressing issues such as Soldier/Leader standards and discipline issues, wasted funds throughout our government where they could be used elsewhere, and the promoting of quality Soldiers/Leaders not quantity. But what do I know, I am only a CW2.

Response by CW2 Herschel Reeves made Dec 4 at 2017 7:35 PM

CW2 Herschel Reeves — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 19:35:33 -0500

Personally, I wouldn't get a tattoo.

Response by Maj John Bell made May 13 at 2018 9:19 AM

Maj John Bell — Sun, 13 May 2018 09:19:03 -0400

Don't ask me... I don't understand why ANY human would get a tattoo. I tattoo goats to identify them and their bloodlines for the American Dairy Goat Association registry.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made May 13 at 2018 11:43 AM

SGM Bill Frazer — Sun, 13 May 2018 11:43:47 -0400

Why? I survived 22+ years- no tats, even as an Abn Rgr- no tats!. You are suppose to lead by example. You get a tat, and the next CJCS or ACS changes the reg and you are in trouble- is it worth it? Also tats are hard/costly to get off and don't age well. Saw a Pic where a pert 20 gal got a pretty butterfly across her chest- they aged the pic with a computer and showed her a 60- butterfly looked like a buzzard with its wings drooping.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2018 3:40 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 13 May 2018 15:40:50 -0400

I don't know current regs for any services. I believe they are now more strict though. Never knew of any restrictions by rank. Warrants and CWOs are all former Enlisted in USMC, so it's assumed that they might be more likely to have tattoos. I never wanted anything other than the scars to remind me. There are things that are looked down on for Regular Officers. I've been in a few commands where it was "strongly encouraged" for Os to not have a moustache, even if it was within regs. Some COs frowned on high and tight haircuts too. Depends on the CO.

Response by SFC Jimmy Williams made Dec 21 at 2018 6:25 PM

SFC Jimmy Williams — Fri, 21 Dec 2018 18:25:36 -0500

I served from 17 years old to 39. No tats. A we got a 12 hour pass towards the end of basic and the CO ordered us to NOT get a tattoo. Of course some did. One guy got it infected and missed 5 days of training. He got an art 15 and recycled to the next BCT cycle. I don't think it was worth it to him. I am 62 now and my body looks bad enough from scars and life without having a bunch of mis-sharpened and twisted tats.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2018 8:59 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:59:16 -0500

Personal pet peeves don't supersede doctrine. BLUF: if its 670-1 compliant, the other concerns are irrelevant.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2018 9:38 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 09:38:49 -0500

Under old school social norms, officers did not get tattoos. Yes, I follow these norms and choose not to have any, but there is no regulation either. It sort of goes along with officers being required to play golf on the weekends as well. It is not required. I am not a tattoo advocate, but if they are within regulation, then it is your own private business if you choose to have them.

Response by SFC William Huse made Dec 23 at 2018 9:45 PM

SFC William Huse — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:45:36 -0500

As long as it is something classy and not overwhelming and is not seen above the neckline. Go for it

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2018 12:49 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:49:46 -0500

Why does it matter if someone in a leadership position has tattoos? Tattoos do not define a person on how they can lead a group of people effectively.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2018 4:45 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:45:28 -0500

I am a SSG and have tattoos. It makes no difference if you have tattoos or not. Tattoos dont dictate what kind of soldier you are. No matter what rank. What matters is (in the military) is that you are in regs. Period.

Response by SSG Lyle O'Rorke made Dec 24 at 2018 6:53 PM

SSG Lyle O'Rorke — Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:53:10 -0500

It’s funny you mention the no smoking “policy” for officers. Having worked at theater staff level I knew a few GOs and a good number of O5 and O6s that smoked. They just tried to make sure that the soldiers didn’t see them. Drove a 2 star for a week. Would stop short of the installations we were visiting and smoke with him so that he could get his fix before an afternoon of briefings.

Response by SSG Ian Faling made Dec 24 at 2018 10:11 PM

SSG Ian Faling — Mon, 24 Dec 2018 22:11:19 -0500

As an NCO the best NCO’s I have ever had bore ink. As far as officers including warrants you are educated gentlemen. I am completely for an officer with ink. It shows you’re connected to the enlisted but that is not your job. The best officer I ever had didn’t have a piece of ink on him nor did he allow officers to use tobacco or energy drinks. At first I saw this as he was an elitist but after seeing him lead my company in combat and his dedication to the enlisted I felt it was their job to lead by example. On top of that the the Ranger tabbed, SF tabbed, CIB wearing badass was gay. Didn’t matter respect the troops! Inked, tobacco using, gay warrior I will follow you anywhere!

Response by CPT Don Kemp made Dec 25 at 2018 6:56 AM

CPT Don Kemp — Tue, 25 Dec 2018 06:56:12 -0500

Times change. Tattoos don’t.

I got out in ‘83 with no tattoos. Nor did I know any officers with tattoos at that time.

I was in line at a water-based amusement parks years later. It was obvious the two young men behind me in line were soldiers from their haircuts. From their piercings, including nipple rings, I assumed they were soldiers from Ft Benning. When I began talking with them, I was surprised to find they were recent West Point grads attending Infantry Officer Basic.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2018 2:09 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Dec 2018 14:09:18 -0500

I imagine your question comes in response to the Army requiring that Soldiers document tattoos with their unit. Part of me has wondered the same thing

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2018 8:32 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Dec 2018 20:32:24 -0500

I used to work for the adc for 1 ad and he had some tattoos. He also liked to smoke cigars. I guess it depends on the officer.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2018 11:24 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Dec 2018 11:24:13 -0500

All they see on selection/promotion boards is a DA photo in ASUs and your height/weight. How would they know if you have tattoos on your promotion/selection board? It’s not like your command can slip in a memo stating this Soldier has tattoos and as long as it doesn’t show in your photo no one will know.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2018 8:33 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:33:16 -0500

I’ve always followed the t shirt rule. If it’s covered by a t shirt then it’d fine. That way they can’t bitch about them

Response by CPT Chris Loomis made Dec 27 at 2018 12:46 AM

CPT Chris Loomis — Thu, 27 Dec 2018 00:46:51 -0500

I would NEVER see a problem with it.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2018 7:33 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Dec 2018 07:33:16 -0500

I've read that traditionally, Officers shouldn't have tattoos. That being said, I don't really pay much mind, and I think I've seen plenty of officers with them, and never seen them being treated differently, since probably 99% of the time, they are covered by your uniform. I think there is the practical reason not to get them because if the regs change, you may find you are out of reg.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2018 12:47 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Dec 2018 12:47:02 -0500

i follow written regulations, not opinions of seniors. If they can’t separate their personal beliefs from work and rate fairly based on performance, that’s there problem.

Response by SGT Justin Teague made Dec 27 at 2018 5:30 PM

SGT Justin Teague — Thu, 27 Dec 2018 17:30:27 -0500

Who cares how one is dressed or if they have tattoo? It's all arbitrary... as long as the SM can still do their job it shouldn't matter. Too much time is spent on things like this instead of readiness.... we need to be ready to address threats to our nation, not the fashion police

Response by MAJ Steve Daugherty made Dec 28 at 2018 10:10 PM

MAJ Steve Daugherty — Fri, 28 Dec 2018 22:10:50 -0500

Although more accepted now than in the past , one should think long and hard before getting a tatoo

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2018 11:20 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Dec 2018 23:20:16 -0500

There are informal cultural norms you must adhere to within an organization, that change as leadership does. Some care whether you smoke or have tats, others don’t. I have seen officers openly discriminate based on this, but also on lots of other informal requirements. It seems to be an older generational thing but is surviving to an extent. It’s a dice roll but I have a feeling that if a guy can’t see past your majestic Stache he was already looking for reasons to make you a bill player in his senior rater pool.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2018 12:41 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 29 Dec 2018 12:41:15 -0500

We had an old salty CW3 and he had his whole upper body tatted in a hunting scene. Was quite bad ass but I never even knew he had it till another Joe told me. Then I had him show it to me and it's pretty damn impressive. So no their are plenty of warrants with tattoos. I have met more with then without

Response by PO1 Daniel Brock made Dec 29 at 2018 7:57 PM

PO1 Daniel Brock — Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:57:38 -0500

Can't speak for the Army, but on the USN side, all CWO's start as CPO's with at least 12 years in service. It's hard to find a CWO without tattoo's. Although, sometimes it does happen.

Response by CPT Clifford Breeden Jr made Dec 31 at 2018 5:09 AM

CPT Clifford Breeden Jr — Mon, 31 Dec 2018 05:09:08 -0500

Get one, don't get one, it really is up to you. As long as you conform to the Regs and isn't objectionable, offensive, racist, or anything else they'll complain about, you're fine. I've never had one, thought about getting "Made in Japan" tattooed on my butt once because I was born in Japan but decided against it. My dad who was a retired E-9 from the Navy had a bunch, still made E-9 and no one care.

Response by SPC Josh Pittsenbarger made Dec 31 at 2018 10:17 PM

SPC Josh Pittsenbarger — Mon, 31 Dec 2018 22:17:46 -0500

That's why I got out. Blue Falconed for too many tattoos which were to hostile for an Infantry Officer.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 1 at 2019 12:11 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:11:48 -0500

Whether you agree with something or not, by the book is by the book. That whole adding to, not taking away mentality in my opinion is prejudicial

Response by SPC Chris Ison made Jan 6 at 2019 8:09 PM

SPC Chris Ison — Sun, 06 Jan 2019 20:09:07 -0500

It depends on the tattoo and the location.

If you were in the 82nd, in a time of war and in country, for instance, and you got the AA on your right shoulder, that is okay by me.

You get jump wings tattooed on your chest? yeah fine by me too.

No face or neck tattoos. regardless of the policy, it is just unprofessional as hell in my opinion.

Sleeves, or any tattoo on the forearm, as long as it is tasteful, i.e. no naked dancers, swear words, etc. Also nothing that you might think is "ironically funny" as it is probably offensive to someone, or some group. This is the ARMY we are representing not Jack in the Box.

Response by SGT Charles Bartell made Jan 7 at 2019 2:56 PM

SGT Charles Bartell — Mon, 07 Jan 2019 14:56:10 -0500

Wheter you have Ink or not does not have any berring on how Good or Bad someone is as a leader. I had A team leader when I was in 511th M.P. Co 10th mountain Jan 2000 to Sept 2001. His Ink was nasty Prono in nature, But this was befor the ban on some kinds of Ink. his was on his hands and neck. He was the example of what wrong in every sence looked like.
On the other hand at 4/7 cav Dec 2001 to Nov 2001 My Sguad leader had Ink as well on his arms and coving his back. His was back Faimly Creast. Arms I do do not recall, But all of his was Well done and tastfull.
Then I went to 6th R.T.B. Jan 2002 To Nov 2005 About have the Leader ship had ink. Most well done some of that Ft.Benning AIT stuff. There ink played No factor in how they did ther jobs as Ranger Instructors. I can Honestly say That I may not have liked some of them but they all did there jobs very well.
Then the 1/32inf 3rd BCT. Ft drum. Dec 2005 to Oct 2007.
Turn out that a some of the Ranger Instructors had been sent to 1/32 has well as most of the LT'S and some Cpt's that had gone to ranger school when I was working there.
I was glad to see all but one. Any way A lot of them had ink in one place or anthere.
All of these men not onlay did there job's as Leaders. Most of them by there actions saved the lives of meny of the men under them.
And sadly some of them gave there life in doing so.
My point is that if some one belive's that have ink makes any less of a leader, They need to get the fuck out of the military. 99.9% Of people with Ink are good hard working honest people.

Response by CWO2 Shelby DuBois made Feb 19 at 2019 2:43 PM

CWO2 Shelby DuBois — Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:43:52 -0500

NO. But then again, it's my opinion. Regulations cover your answer already. I taught my kids not to write on on themselves...hard to say stop it...wait until you're an adult. I personally think it's juvenile. Now don't hate, but typically I get a load of hate mail from those who somehow feel threatened or got their feeling hurt and retaliate by a bunch of name calling and belittling crap. You asked.

Response by CW5 Mark Smith made Feb 13 at 2020 12:02 AM

CW5 Mark Smith — Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:02:12 -0500

Just my opinion, you are better off without them. Regs change as well as fads. I seriously considered an Eagle, Globe, and Anchor tattoo on my shoulder as a young Marine. That would have played out well after I switched to the Army.