Why are tattoo regulations so strict? Do they hinder your ability to fire a weapon?

Tattoos do not tell anyone who someone is unless they are founded in negative imagery. If the tattos are visable in unform then they my display an image Service members don't/shouldn't support.

Regulation was changed because of MSG. In my opinion, make the ban on tattoos MSG specific, not Corps wide. If you ever get a chance to go to the rolling hills of Arlington, look around and ask yourself which of them had sleeves.

Being in the military is not a right nd it's not just about firing a weapon. If you don't like the standard, get out and get a convoy security job. I'm barely within regulation as far as my tattoos are concerned but I understand that if I want to be a Marine, I need to follow orders.

For some its part of the quality long-term decision making abilities let alone the branding or being a representative of who you work for. We have a veteran that, we are trying to help find work for, that had a tree tattooed across his face. Would you hire him as a representative of your company or your unit in any serious capacity?

I just wanted to touch base, since I don't have the time it would take to respond to each individual that has posted. These are great responses and I appreciate your insight and opinions greatly! Semper Fidelis!

As Marine from 70's and 80's with a tattoo on upper right arm I didn't see a problem with them . Today though tattoo's are far more colorful and the young today have them on their necks and all up and down their arms which doesn't look right for Marine Corps . Chest , back , upper arms, legs and stomach I have no problem with . But I also don't have a problem with a bit longer hair and mustache being longer and not looking like Adolph Hitler like Marine reg's make you look like. Also don't have problem with tasteful tattoos on forearm as long as it isn't to large or gawdy.

At the 4 minute mark upon my arrival at Parris Island, South Carolina, I kind of figured out that the military wasn't a democracy. It's up to the institution, something that'll be there long after we've been buried. I have tattoos, but I followed what were the regs at the time because I wanted a special duty later on. I'm all for them, unfortunately some guys go overboard and either get something unappealing to the populace or it doesn't fall into line with what the service views as professional. Tats on the neck, skull, hands, full body, doesn't hinder you physically, but it's not what they want. Most businesses and of course the armed forces tend to be conservative, only because it's a catch-all default that allows everyone to feel comfortable dealing with them. Many places will simply require you to cover them up as best you can or may not hire you. Some don't care as long as it doesn't cause grief with others. In the end, I've learned that unless you're the owner or the grand poobah, it's not about you (generalization, not personal), it's about what the man/woman who is in charge wants for their organization.

I love tattoos. Unfortunately not everyone else does. Have you ever thought having them removed in order to serve your nation?

Any questions?

no but i bet some fat politician behind a desk raised the issue and our leadership followed