Has anyone seen the new Tattoo policy yet? If so can you please post the ALCOAST.

There is no change to the tattoo policy, yet. And I have no doubt that if and when an ALCOAST is released with any changes that it will be posted all over the boards and Internet.

Roger that MC, I know the COMDT has approved the change back to the way it was, No head, neck and hands. I am on leave and was just curious if anyone had seen the change. Thanks for your service and leadership.

quote:

I have no doubt that if and when an ALCOAST is released with any changes that it will be posted all over the boards and Internet.

No doubt there...hope all is well MC.

CS

I heard from a little birdy that the policy is changing, hands, neck and face still off limits but that 25% stuff is out the window

Before you add more tattoos to visible parts of your body you may want to swing by a VFW or American Legion post to see what tattoos look like after 20, 30 or more years.

Owner of faded, stretched, blurry tattoos offers his advice......

quote:

Originally posted by Ex_CG_GM:
Before you add more tattoos to visible parts of your body you may want to swing by a VFW or American Legion post to see what tattoos look like after 20, 30 or more years.

The science on tattooing and the inks used today have all but eliminated the aged and blurred tattoo of years ago. Provided that you take some care of it after you get it, is should hold color and definition for many years.

And as I said above before I'd advise anyone add to their tattoo collection, I'd wait for the revised policy to hit the streets. There were 2 firmly entrenched camps of opinion on how the policy should be revised. And the jury is out on what the final verdict will be.

quote:

The science on tattooing and the inks used today have all but eliminated the aged and blurred tattoo of years ago. Provided that you take some care of it after you get it, is should hold color and definition for many years.

Three of my tattoos were applied by Sailor Jerry in Hawaii in 1970-71. They still have a good amount of color. The issue, as time goes on, is your skin, not the ink or needles used. Few people remain the same shape throughout their lives. As your body changes shape (OK, as you gain weight!) the tattoos will stretch. In addition, young skin is much more flexible and resilient than old skin.

I see all these young gals getting tattooed and wonder how that will look after three kids and 20 years......

I once told my nephew's wife that the butterfly she had tattooed on her thigh when she was 19 would be an Eagle by 45. That went well.

Like the lady that had a Kanji tattoo that stated "Have Fun" done on her panty line, and after three kids it now says "Had Fun"

quote:

Originally posted by Hooligan1790:
I once told my nephew's wife that the butterfly she had tattooed on her thigh when she was 19 would be an Eagle by 45. That went well.

Awesome!

Oh man, I hope this isn't the same type of scuttlebutt that was goin around like 2 yrs ago. I would love for them to go back to the old policy. If it changes back Sammy's gettin sleeved out before they can change their minds.

Also who really cares where a SAILOR has a tattoo(I understand the face & neck thing), as long as he can do his/her share of work who gives a damn how much paint is on them. I've said this before and I'll say it again. If you don't like my tattoos, don't look at them. I've actually got quite a few complements on mine (Traditional style), while doing boarding. More entrigue(spelling?) than disgust.

Ex CG GM- You got yours from the real "Sailor Jerry" Collins! That is awesome. I have some of his timeless art on me to bad they weren't put on by him. He really set the standard for the "Sailor" tattoo. And his rum is just as Good

Has anyone heard anything new on a release date?

anything?

Good news if the 25% is going out the window, but its sounds like crossed anchors on the hands are still a no go huh?

Just for clarification: The old policy never said anything prohibiting tattoos on the hands. I know several active duty members who have them and all that was required when the new policy went into effect was a waiver. Only the face and neck were the places you could not get them.

quote:

Originally posted by DeckE:
Good news if the 25% is going out the window, but its sounds like crossed anchors on the hands are still a no go huh?

Those are birthmarks, not tattoos!

quote:

Just for clarification: The old policy never said anything prohibiting tattoos on the hands. I know several active duty members who have them and all that was required when the new policy went into effect was a waiver. Only the face and neck were the places you could not get them.

Are you sure that was the policy? I guess I booted someone from the CG by mistake. Folks you had tattoo on thier hands as of the date of the instruction were grandfathered. After that date not so much.

5. POLICY.
a. Location. No tattoo or brand, of any type, is authorized on the head, face, neck, or hands. The dark blue Coast Guard T-shirt collar shall be the reference point for the back and sides of the neck; i.e., no tattoo or brand may be visible above the collar of the T-shirt on the neck. In the case of a tattoo or brand very near the collarbone, a final evaluation shall be made to ensure that no tattoo or brand is visible when wearing a v-neck undershirt and an open collar shirt. The wrist bone shall be the reference point for tattoos or brands on the hands. No tattoos or brands shall be visible below the wrist bone.

RWT;
I think you got lost in language there:

Definitions:

"New" Policy means the most current one, the one that applies today.

"Old" means ones that are not in effect right now.

The one you quoted is the "New" one.

The FUTURE ONE, that MIGHT BE signed and released may or may not say something different.