Civilan Attire

[Drill for life]

I was at the mall on Friday and I saw a guy who claimed to be a Army Soldier. He knew all the phases and the training and showed me pics on his phone(I eventually believed him). My point is I didn't believe him because he all of these piercing(looked real emo) and had all of these weird gothic tattoos on his arms and neck. Do you think Civilian Attire should determine if people think you have completed Basic or not?
A lot of people don't believe me when I tell them I am DEP in the Marine Corps or am a C/Cpt in AJROTC, It hurts when people think you are lying(I know I did the same to that guy, I know I'm calling the kettle Black). What do you guys think?

[pingjocky]

There's two sides of the argument:

1) You are in the military 24/7, and represent your branch (unit, etc...) even in civvies.

2) You have a life outside of the military, and they have no right to dictate what you wear when you are off duty.

The truth?

You are never "off duty" no matter what anyone tries to tell you. You are still "on call" even when you are on leave...trust me, I know...I've had leave canceled before. You still represent everything you do in uniform even when you're out of it. This guy may have been prior service, but there's nothing in the uniform regs (at least Navy regs) about piercing out of uniform. Navy guys can wear whatever piercings they want when they are off base...go through the front gate, the piercings come out. The tats may have been grandfathered in before the crackdown on tats a few years back....he could have had them from his teenage years and gotten waivers.

R/
Pingjocky

[TruBlu]

AR 670-1: "No attaching, affixing, or displaying objects, articles, jewelry or ornamentation to or through the skin while in uniform, in civilian clothes, while on duty, or in civilian clothes off duty on any military installation or other places under Army control. This change supersedes the current male earring policy. This message does not change the current policy regarding female wear of earrings. Female soldiers are authorized to wear earrings on Army installations while on duty in civilian attire and may also wear approved earrings while in uniform."

So why were you wrong in assuming he was not an Army soldier?

[pingjocky]

Originally Posted by TruBlu

AR 670-1: "No attaching, affixing, or displaying objects, articles, jewelry or ornamentation to or through the skin while in uniform, in civilian clothes, while on duty, or in civilian clothes off duty on any military installation or other places under Army control. This change supersedes the current male earring policy. This message does not change the current policy regarding female wear of earrings. Female soldiers are authorized to wear earrings on Army installations while on duty in civilian attire and may also wear approved earrings while in uniform."

So why were you wrong in assuming he was not an Army soldier?

Read it again paying attention to the bold...the mall is "under Army control"?

R/
Pingjocky

[armysc_25b]

The piercings would lead me to believe that at one time he was in the service. What uniform was he in in the pictures he showed you?

As far as the tattoos, the Army's stance is so long as they aren't visible in the Class A uniform they're OK (so no tattoos on your hands, head, and neck). For those who have tattoos in those areas and were in the service when that policy took affect, for those individuals it's OK.

[TruBlu]

Originally Posted by pingjocky

Read it again paying attention to the bold...the mall is "under Army control"?

R/
Pingjocky

I wasn't really aiming for that, I was aiming for the fact that piercings are not accepted as common practice for military personnel. If they could, which they can't because of our constitutional right to expression (First Amendment), they would regulate it while you were off duty because they encourage you to always maintain the military appearance.

I don't agree with the guy having the piercings, but he did serve to protect his and our own right to do that, so you can't take that away from him. Maybe its just me, but I don't think guys with tons of piercings or "emo" tattoos scream Army, or any other branch at that.

[pingjocky]

piercings are not accepted as common practice for military personnel

How ya figure? I've seen Master Chiefs with some pretty outrageous piercings...off base. On base, they come out. Just because you see a guy with piercings, tats, yes, even brandings (one of my good friends on my boat has some pretty gnarly brands) doesn't mean he isn't military. Is it right? That's not for you or I to decide...we don't write the regs.

R/
Pingjocky

[TruBlu]

Originally Posted by pingjocky

How ya figure? I've seen Master Chiefs with some pretty outrageous piercings...off base. On base, they come out. Just because you see a guy with piercings, tats, yes, even brandings (one of my good friends on my boat has some pretty gnarly brands) doesn't mean he isn't military. Is it right? That's not for you or I to decide...we don't write the regs.

R/
Pingjocky

I see what you are saying, and agree that its not for you or I to decide what is right or wrong, that's why I mentioned our Constitution. It's their decision, they can wear or pierce what ever they want out of uniform, off duty, and off base. I will not repeal my personal dislike for the appearance of piercings for military personal as that is simply my opinion (not like it matters, I haven't even served but I'm still entitled to an opinion, just as much as he is to wear those piercings).

[pingjocky]

I mentioned our Constitution

Now I'm jumping way off-topic here, but since you did bring up the First Amendment....why don't you do some actual research on the First Amendment, and start a thread on whether "Body Piercing" is considered "free speech" (as defined by the First Amendment), and tell us why or why not?

R/
Pingjocky

p.s. I now return you to your regularly scheduled "civilian attire" thread....