If you looked at the linked ‘racist’ tattoos, and the linked tattoos on the potential recruit, they look nothing alike at all. They do indeed look like the suit of spiderman, which is probably what they are intended to reproduce.
The person who took him off the bus either was having a power-trip ( in the military? no way! :rolleyes: ), or took his natural human powers of association a little too far. Or both.
The fact that he made it through MEPS at all with those tattoos, a place where they make you duck-walk in your underwear ( I’d know), show me that there is truly nothing wrong with them.
Look you fucking ignorant jackass. Contrary to what you THINK you know, a recruiter does NOT decide who gets in and who doesn’t. The people at MEPS do. All the recruiter does is filter out the obvious fuck-ups who can’t make the cut: people grossly overweight, people with felonies, people with disabilities etc…
Apparently this guys tattoos didn’t DQ him in the recruiters eyes, though it did at MEPS. In fact, the guy MUST have gone thru MEPS at some point before “bording a bus headed to Fort Benning” and was apparently not DQd at that point so why the fuck would the recruiter throw up the flag?
I’m kinda suprised that it took the people at MEPS more than one visit to make the call on that, but in the end, they did and that’s their job.
(MEPS- Military Entrance Processing Station. It’s where you see the docs and get physically cleared)
Mhendo, I still don’t see why you think its the recruiters who fucked up. You say they were ignorant of the regs.
Visible tattoos or brands on the neck, face or head are prohibited. Tattoos on other areas of the body that are prejudicial to good order and discipline are prohibited. Additionally, any type of tattoo or brand that is visible while wearing a Class A uniform and detracts from a soldierly appearance is prohibited.
Where in the regs is it so obvious that he would be rejected?
Maybe it’s not. But either the tattoos violate the regs, or they don’t. The guy was told they were fine, then he was told they weren’t.
As i’ve been suggesting in all my posts, the main problem here is one of consistency. The military should have procedures in place to ensure that issues like this are dealt with before some poor sap changes his whole life on the say-so of a recruiter. The recruiters should have it made very clear to them who they are and are not allowed to pass to the next level, and at the next level (which is apparently the MEPS) there should be stringent controls in place to ensure that every possible issue is examined and dealt with at the earliest possible time.
A potential recruit has no way of knowing that the recruiter’s reassurances about his tattoos might be wrong, or that he might get shafted on that same issue further along the line. When the recruiter/s told that guy that his tatts were fine, he had no reason not to believe them. I assume that the recruiters make it clear to recruits that a doctor will need to give them a physical, and that entry to the service is conditional on passing this physical. Why not also make it clear to the recruit that the recruiters do not have the final say on tattoos. If the article is correct, the recruiters gave no such warnings; they stated outright that the tattoos were fine.
If there’s any possibility that the guy’s tatts were going to be a problem, the recruiters should have gone up the ladder and asked someone who could actually make a decision. They should, at the very least, have made a note so that MEPS would look specifically at this issue when the recruit first arrived there.
That’s why Stinkpalm’s rantings are so pointless. So, it may not have been the recruiters who messed up? OK, i’ve already conceded that, but someone fucked up, and that someone was in the military. As Stinkpalm concedes:
All this does is further point up how inconsistent the system is. The recruiters all passed this guy, and then MEPS apparently let him go the first time, but then finally MEPS decide that, contrary not only to the recruiters, but also to their own previous assessment, the guy was no good. Brilliant screening procedure!
Maybe, but if so then it’s their job to get it right on the first fucking go.
I must say that though I understand the desire for conformity, it burns me that this guy who wants to be in the military can’t get in, while Nation Guard members and people who thought that they were done with their service are being sent to Iraq.
I do have to say that the issue might not be tattoos, though that may have been the manifest reason given to this person. He may have struck someone as unsuited for service for other reasons.
Sometimes it’s possible for unfortunate events to unfold without someone or something actually “fucking up”. The recruitors, not knowing the meaning of a spiderweb tattoo, made a mistake by telling him so many times that there would be no problems. But this was made in good faith. Though a recruitor is and should be required to know all the enlistment regulations, he can’t be required to know the meaning of every jailhouse tattoo. Somewhere down the line, someone realized the signifigance of his markings and refused his enlistment. That’s the system at work. It sucks, it really does. Especially after what he’s been through. He should really consider just having it removed or covered-up and then re-enlisting.
Thaumaturge,
It is definitely an unfortunate turn of events. But the fact that he made it through MEPS and “The Duck Walk” says nothing about his tattoos. These exams are given by doctors looking for physical impairments, not criminologists looking for gang tats. The fact that he was sent home before even arriving at Benning shows me that there IS something wrong with his tattoos. As I mentioned, usually people are turned away after being examined at Ft. Benning. That’s where the real in depth tattoo exams are held. That’s where people are sent home. They don’t get discharged, they have their enlistment annulled. Some times that paperwork takes a while though. I’ve seen it take months to send a recruit home because of his tattoos. A guy can spend two or three months in the Army, collecting pay but doing jack shit, only to be sent home with no record that he was even in the Army. It just so happens that someone caught his markings a little earlier. Most likely, he had some sleveless or short-sleeved shirt on while getting on the bus and someone grabbed him. It was probably this person’s intent to save the man the trouble of going all the way to Benning just to be returned. He saved that guy, the Army a great deal of hassel. He wasn’t trying to “screw him over”. Not to mention the money he saved tax payers. (Though almost irrelevant in the great scheme of things.)
It sucks that the guy turned all that stuff down, but he would have been sent back home in a couple days to a couple months anyway. Someone just happened to catch him EARLIER than usual. He was not caught LATE, as some people are suggesting. Tattoos are examined at 30th AG Battalion, Ft. Benning. NOT MEPS.
You misundersood. I used the words “Many recruitors”. To me, “many” means “a whole butt-load”, whereas just the word “recruitors” means “All Recruitors”. Like if I said “many mammals live in the ocean”, as opposed to “mammals live in the ocean”. The latter sounds as if I am saying ALL Mammals live in the ocean.
Anyway, I was just saying that my statement was “many recruitors” and you misquoted me. I just wanted it clear that I was not accussing recruitors at large of being quota driven fucks. Just some. And not necessarily the ones in question.
Also, a retraction is not necessary. I know it wasn’t on purpose. I was just sayin “be careful” is all.
*** On preview I noticed that I DID say “Recruitors fuck people over all the time.” I guess I need to be more damn careful. When I read that, I thought “I know I didnt say that!”. Then I looked at the paragraph and quickly saw the last sentence “Many recruitors are quota driven assholes…”, and thought "See, I knew I said “Many Recruitors.”
Anyway, I’ll stop wasting thread space on such a moot point. My fault, carry-on!
I’ll agree to that. If there was a possibility, then they should have looked into it further. But if they didn’t know about the meaning of the tat, then I dont see where they had reason to believe there was a possibility.
And as I said before, there was no malicious intent. Not that you are suggesting there is, but I just want to make that clear.
There isn’t someone picking on this guy; no Army guy somewhere with a “power trip”. The recruitor should have maybe looked into this a little more. Especially if all the other branches declined him. We don’t know that he told the recruitors this though. He says he asked several times about his tattoos. But it doesn’t say he told the recruitors he had been declined by everyone else.
But consistency is a problem. I’ll give you that. Maybe a better policy would be to have all tattoos cleared through someone at MEPS before sending them to Benning - not just pre-screened. The Army would need to place someone at every MEPS specifically on “tattoo” duty. Would it be worth it? To head off the few cases like this every year?? Maybe.
Or maybe just if someone asks to be reassurred several times about his tattoos, the recruitor could go the extra step and MAKE SURE. I’ll concede to that.
Damn… you would not believe how much I use dictionary.com, either!! I always keep it in a seperate window when I post. I never thought to look that one up. Thanks.
It’s not suprising because it is not their job. It’s the job of the Drill Sergeants at 30th Adjunct General Battalion (Reception), Ft. Benning, GA to “make the call on that”. Someone caught him getting on the bus for some reason and grabbed him, knowing that he would be declined. Most likely trying to save the guy the hassle and the trip!
Or maybe it was just a figure of speech or a misunderstanding on the part of the author. Maybe he WAS declined at 30th AG, and “getting on the bus” was a figure of speech. Meaning, it was very early and he hadn’t been to BASIC yet. A person is marched to his training company FROM 30th AG. But not having cleared, he might have thought he would be taking a bus. (I thought I was going to get on a bus. But then they said, “You’re Infantry now son. We’re walking!!”) So when he talked to reporters he would say “I was on my way to get on the bus…” That is also a possibility. And if that is the case, this is no different than all the other cases where people are denied for their tattoos. They make it all the way to 30th, and then are turned away.
It’s also possible that the guy is leaving out the fact that the Army offerred to remove his tattoos, but he declined. He could just be whining that since the recruitEr told him it was ok, then he shouldn’t have to get it removed. And the Army said “tough shit. remove them or go home”. So he decided to go home and bitch about it. Now he’s going to tell his story to the world and make it look like he is such a victim. Those are points to consider.
Cite? I highly doubt that its not anyone elses responsibility to make sure a recruit is acceptable by Army standards and that that is left to Drill Sergeants, especially since other branches of the military turned him down. Once you make it to Basic, its the job of the DIs to make a soldier out of a qualified recruit.
I don’t think that his tattoo looks like the Aryan Brotherhood “spiderweb” tattoo… More than likely you’ll be able to link the symbolism of almost any tattoo design to some objectionable group or another. And I saw a number of people in bootcamp with tattoos more interesting and extensive than the “grid” tattoo. I’d think in cases where it’s not clear (i.e. they’re not covered in swastikas or “Death to Whitey”) what it means to the recruit should be taken into account. Though, I’d rather take a guy that had a swastika, but thought of it as the hindu wheel of life… than some racist bastard without a single bit of ink on his Pure White Skin™.
There was a guy that had “FUCK YOU” tattooed on the striking edge of his right hand (i.e. left-to-right as read from the wrist)… This had some interesting effects on saluting (which was his intention), but he eventually got discharged (which was also his intention) for other reasons. I can think of a couple people who have tattoos visible on their hands (ye old letters on the knuckles), ears (an anarchy symbol), or other places that would be visible while in any uniform.
Unless there’s something else we’re not being told… I hope the guy can get the decision reconsidered and be allowed to join.
stinkpalm, that was merely a pre-screening. Obviously if you had a huge swashtika or “I HATE NIGGERS” tattoo, then they would have turned you away at MEPS. But it’s not in depth by any means. The get a list of all your tattoos at MEPS and then the drill sergeants know who to check out when they arrive.
x-ray vision,
Man it sucks when “I was there, I’ve been through the system” no longer works as a freakin cite.
The drill sergeants at 30th AG are not responsible for “making a soldier” out of you. They could give a fuck.
The drill sergeants at 30th AG are responsible for getting you in-processed. This includes getting your initial issue, initial hair-cut, getting your pay straight, and all that crap. Think of it as purgatory. You’re not a civilian anymore, but you’re not at BASIC or OSUT yet.
The other branches seem to do things a little differently. From what I’ve heard from my AF buddies and seen of Marines on Discovery (of all places), they send people directly to their Basic training company. Because of their different methods of operating, maybe they require their recruiters to do a better job of screening things like tattoos.
I was in the Air Force and we had to go through all of that also, only it was once we got to Basic. However, we still had to go through MEPS just like Army recruits, correct ? You really don’t think it was the responsibility of the folks at MEPS to catch this?