This story originates in Des Moines, Iowa (you know, I never quite understood the pronunciation of that city! Maybe that is my southern redneck grammar kicking in, I don’t know for sure). But, I certainly did understand the story.
It seems that many of Des Moines’ finest will soon have to go undercover after the police department adopted a policy restricting body art (for my fellow rednecks, that basically means tattoos). The new policy says that any tattoos, branding and intentional scarring on the face, head, neck, hands, or exposed arms and legs are prohibited. The employees who already have tattoos are exempt from the new policy but they must provide photographs of their existing tattoos—I guess at some point, a new photo will have to be taken to ensure they haven’t added more tattoos, thereby breaking the department’s rules. (Maybe the department will need to set up a tattoo/branding/scarring investigative department to ensure compliance!)
Of course, you would know that the police union has spoken out against the policy. The union president (a Mr. Barnes) said the policy is unreasonable and he has filed a grievance.
Also, as no surprise, the policy chief, Judy Bradshaw, has defended the new policy. She says that tattoos distract from a professional image.
I love the last statement made by the Des Moines police union president. He said that his tattoos sometimes help with his job by providing a common ground with young people.
Oh, where do I start with this one? I guess a disclaimer is in order here. I don’t have any tattoos. I probably would, but I’m allergic to needles! Well, that’s not quite true, I’m more allergic to pain! I cannot for the life of me envision willingly having someone inject dye through a needle into my body over and over again! I just can’t see that happening!
I also don’t like the idea of thinking about what the tattoos will look like in 10 years or 20 years. You’ve seen older people with tattoos, right? The eagle they once proudly flew on their arm now looks more like a sickly or dead vulture! Or what about the people who have their husband or wife’s name tattooed on their body, only to divorce that person later! How would you like to be the NEXT spouse to have to see that tattoo every day for the rest of your life?
The police union president’s comment about the new policy really struck me. He said that it provided him with common ground to talk with the young people. Well, if that’s the case, is Mr. Barnes going to start wearing baggy pants to work every day? Is he going to proudly let everyone see his boxer shorts as his pants hang low? Is he going to get a nose piercing or lip piercing or worse?
At one time, police officers and fire personnel were people to look up to and admire—they rarely wanted to be seen like everyone else. They took pride in their appearance and demeanor. Apparently, some in Des Moines have a problem with that.
What do you think? Am I being too hard on Mr. Barnes? Am I being unfair to people with tattoos? Do you have a tat that you’d like to tell the world about?
As you have time, let me hear from you.
First up--no tattoos!
ReplyDeleteIf a connection with young people is his only justification, it is pretty flimsy. I would just as soon prefer he simply said "personal preference." There are a lot of more effective ways to connect with people.
I try not to be too hard on people with body art because their are typically a plethora of reasons why they have it; solidarity with a group, fad or styles, expressing oneself...I personally think there are better ways.
Is there a biblical stand you can take against it? The only passages about body art, IIRC, are in Leviticus where marking one's body was prohibited because it meant association with the heathen. However, in the NT, such laws were repealed as the law then becomes written on one's heart and becomes more about inward compulsion rather than outward representation and conformity.
I also think tattoos are representative of certain subcultures that may be opposed to police and could represent a conflict of interest (to say the least).
My personal opinion is that if this is a rule that the dept has adopted, it is incumbent upon the officers to obey it; this would be more in conformity with what the Bible says about being under authority and is not so much about tattoos.
I have no beef with the rule. I don't have any but believe one or two doesn't look tacky for some. I won't get any but professional organizations have the right to have the rules you want.
ReplyDeleteThis is actually an issue I have had to deal, and have thought about on several occasions.
ReplyDeletePat Summitt, head coach of Tennessee's Lady Vols has had a "no tattoo" policy for her team for a number of years (I assume she still has it). Her reasoning was that her players needed to rise above the need to please society and do what society does. IF they have one, or get one, they have to keep it covered with a flesh-covered band-aid.
My objections to tattoos are many and varied. I have just never understood why people want to do what so many other people do to express individuality. ???
As far as the policy, I don't see it as inherently unfair. Now, if I have a non-visible tattoo, and personnel made me strip down to check, I would have some problems with that.
And, if someone just absolutely, positively *has* to have one, there are a lot less intrusive, less destructive, less permanent ways of doing it.
All that to say, I did mention getting my nose pierced the other day. I'll let y'all guess what Bernard's reaction was. :)
Tony...so, should the officer resign or should he fight the policy? How far does he have to submit to the authority of the police chief?
ReplyDeleteKarma, I feel about the same way about piercing as I do tattoos--there's a needle involved, and a hole stuck in the body. Just too much pain involved.
Now, a pony tail, I've been trying to convince my wife for several years that I need one of those! No pain involved (except in her having to look at me) and the pain I get if I tried to grow one (of having to live with her!)
Kevin...you think one or two are okay? On any part of the body? Or should they be more private?
ReplyDeleteNo tattoo here. My Criminal Justice professor always told us that a lot of PDs don't allow tattoos for safety reasons. You never know what becomes a gang sign. I mean wearing a NY Yankees hat is popular these days for a lot of gangs. Any cop with a tattoo takes the chance of inadvertently escalating an encounter.
ReplyDeleteAlso, like you mentioned, they don't really look that professional. I support the rule whole-heartedly.
P.S. I do plan to respond to your message on my board. I just want to think it out.
Have a great weeekend!
Steve, a hairdresser in the mall had this huge tatoo of a red rose with lace of roses all around it. It went from her foreare to above her elbow about 5 inches. When my 3-year old granddaughter saw it, she cowered into my arms and wouldn't look up or speak to this lady. Spoke volumes to me about tatoos in public places. I couldn't get her to let me have her hair cut there for all the icecream flavors in Baskin Robbins. selahV
ReplyDeleteSteve,
ReplyDeleteI don't know that he should do either. I think the dept has the best interests of the people of the community in mind and not necessarily imposing some kind of strict policy for the policy's sake on the officers. It just does not seem all that unreasonable to me, especially in light of Michael's comment. And they weren't prohibited from getting tattoos at all, just in places visible while wearing the uniform.
As far as how far he should submit to the police chief...well, obedience to rules and policy is part of his job, right? The policy doesn't seem that intrusive to me, though.
Mrs. V,
I hope Steve doesn't mind me sharing a tattoo story, either. We were on a mission trip in NH and a group of us were witnessing to a group of college kids on campus at UNH. This one kid had a tattoo of a representation of Satan on his right upper thigh. It covered his whole thigh! As he continued to hear the Gospel and our testimonies, he kept trying to pull the leg of his shorts down to cover the tattoo.
I don't know that he ever got saved, but I always joked around about that guy later that after he got saved, he took a cheese grater to that thigh. (I know, ugly visual, but akin to the transforming power of the Gospel!)
Karma,
I think you would look GREAT with a nose ring.
Karma,
ReplyDeleteI think you would look GREAT with a nose ring.
Do I detect a hint of sarcasm, Rev.?
I have 2 tattoos. I plan to get 2 more. Or 3 more. ??? One of them means nothing to me and it needs redone. It was a cheapy, by an amateur, and the ink was cheap too. However, the other one means the world to me. I got it in memory of the child I lost through miscarriage in December. I will get another of the same tattoo my grandmother got on her 75th birthday. A butterfly. She died 2 weeks before we lost our baby. It will be in memory of her. After that, who knows.
ReplyDeleteI used to have a very closed mind about body art of any kind -- tattoos, piercings. It's a judgment thing.
I think a government agency has every right to impose restrictions on its employees. Same with corporations. If it's their rule, it's their rule, and if a person doesn't like it then they can find another job.
But as for an individual turning his or her nose down at another individual who has decided for himself or herself what he or she is comfortable with (clothes, make-up, tattoos, hairstyle, etc) -- well that's a judgment call, which is sinful in the eyes of the Lord. He is the One and only Judge of His creation. Best leave it at that.
There are many reasons people get tattoos, piercings, and such. Not up to us to approve or deny. It's just not.
Heidi Reed
I don't think a nose ring would work, but I've threatened for years that I was going to grow a pony tail and get my ear pierced. So far, I am 0 for 2 on that list, but life is still going and I have time yet.
ReplyDeleteI've got to do some convincing of the Mrs. first...and I don't think that is going to happen. I did hear her say something about pigs flying or something like that.
Tony, I'm also reminded of the commercial playing right now of the woman getting married. The woman has the name Mike tattooed on her lower back, above where the wedding gown goes. She's trying to hire someone to remove it for her.
ReplyDeleteI've officiated at countless weddings where the brides and attendants are wearing flesh colored bandaids or heavy makeup trying to cover the tattoo on their shoulder or back. Unfortately, about all they wind up doing is having a make-up colored tattoo...still showing through, especially as they begin to sweat in the service!
Ladies, not a good look!
Hope that's not too judgemental!
Rumor has it that you already have a nose ring and she (your wife) pulls on it daily to remind you whose boss.
ReplyDeleteWell...welcome back to you Bill!
ReplyDeleteGlad to see you made it back safely...and in rare form so early in the morning!