If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Arkansas is banning tattoos and body piercing. Cross burning still ok   (thestateweekly.com) divider line 43
    More: Fail, Arkansas Senate, Arkansas, cross burning, Body piercing jewellery  
•       •       •

12194 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 5:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-21 05:31:55 PM  
3 votes:
So THIS is what they mean by "get government off of small businesses' backs".  Hmm.  Interesting.  I don't think I ever want to be around one of these folks and have them declare that they have zero interest in buggering me dry, because I'll be biting a pillow within seconds.
2013-08-21 04:47:32 PM  
3 votes:

Tom_Slick: I think licensing tattoo artists is a good idea, outside of that STFU


I can't see any argument against making sure that there are health codes and safety laws that tattoo artists, piercers, and those who do dermal implants and scarification must abide by. But beyond that, consenting adults should be able to do what they wish with their own bodies.

This seems to be a recurring theme with these lawmakers: "how can we exert control over what people do with, and to, their own bodies?"  Whether it's scarification, bedroom activities, or whatever else.... why do they care so much?  How is this even slightly a pressing public issue?
2013-08-21 04:29:24 PM  
3 votes:
all other problems in Arkansas must have been solved.
2013-08-21 04:21:55 PM  
3 votes:
I think licensing tattoo artists is a good idea, outside of that STFU
2013-08-21 04:16:56 PM  
3 votes:
Yep, smell the small government as the American Taliban strikes again.
2013-08-21 08:05:12 PM  
2 votes:
pikof.com
2013-08-21 06:33:11 PM  
2 votes:

TexanBoy: You know, you may not agree with it, but damned if it isn't their right to vote that way and get it passed in their state. It was obviously important to enough people there to go through, so you should abide by it even if you disagree with it. Unless you're a filthy statist that thinks state's rights are meaningless.


This is why democracy doesn't work. It's mob rule. 51% getting to tell the remaining 49% to go stuff it.
2013-08-21 05:57:54 PM  
2 votes:
This article seems to be particularly thin in the 'details' aspect...

What is the reasoning for the ban?
Is it just the scarification and the dermal implants?
Is the '5 years' thing a way of getting rid of all tattoo and piercing artists eventually, because they can only keep working if they've been doing it for 5 years, or is it 5 years to own a shop?

There's more. Your Blog Sucks, it really does.

What it REALLY seems like is that they want to regulate the industry better, which I'm fine with. You know why? Licensed doctors usually won't do this shiat, so you have Joe Sixpack, with no medical training doing these procedures. Remember the guy who had the threaded spikes in his skull, hit the scene around 2000 or so? Those threaded inserts were drilled into his skull by a local tattoo shop guy, because no doctor would touch him. It's the same today. I have no problem with some regulations, something expanding on already exiting rules about clean equipment, auto-claving needles, etc.

That said, I don't care what someone decides to go through, if they want a trans dermal implant or a big-ass scar, fine, let them get it. As long as it's done safely, I think it's their right.
2013-08-21 05:54:45 PM  
2 votes:

skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.


you sound lonely
& bitter
& un fun at parties
2013-08-21 05:53:29 PM  
2 votes:

skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.


Methinks I smell something under the bridge.
2013-08-21 05:47:53 PM  
2 votes:

scottydoesntknow: Specifically, Irvin's 387 bill would slap a state ban on scarification tattoos as well as dermal implants.

While I think both of these are just unbelievably stupid, I support any person's right to get one.


Exactly, how else are Arkansas businesses supposed to know which resumes to put into the round filing bin next to the desk?
2013-08-21 05:01:33 PM  
2 votes:

James!: Looks like they're only prohibiting sub-dermal implants. The rest of the bill looks to be pretty reasonable.


I certainly believe that body modification businesses should be inspected and subject to health regulations. There are and should be standards. For example: If there is no autoclave, I won't patronize that business and I will tell others to avoid it.
2013-08-21 04:59:03 PM  
2 votes:

serpent_sky: I can't see any argument against making sure that there are health codes and safety laws that tattoo artists, piercers, and those who do dermal implants and scarification must abide by.


No the health codes aren't enough the artist themselves needs to be licensed just like barbers and stylists. To get a license the artist must prove they have a complete understanding of the health codes and safety rules.
2013-08-21 04:14:23 PM  
2 votes:

Somacandra: Because they have nothing better to do than invite court challenges by legitimate businesses with a customer base----both with First Amendment protection?


I'm pretty sure we'll see soon how this ties in to abortion.
2013-08-21 04:11:30 PM  
2 votes:
Because they have nothing better to do than invite court challenges by legitimate businesses with a customer base----both with First Amendment protection?
2013-08-21 10:12:13 PM  
1 votes:

Smeggy Smurf: skinink:At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have.



Find me one person who has this and then I'll take your argument seriously


Agreed. 2 of my tats I designed myself, and 1 more is of an obscure Aztec deity.
2013-08-21 09:39:41 PM  
1 votes:
Yeah, I think all of you who hate tattoos should just leave those women to me. I mean, I know it's a tough job and a sacrifice, but I think I'll manage.

core.gallerynucleus.com
2013-08-21 09:11:59 PM  
1 votes:

propasaurus: skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.

This, from someone named 'skin ink.'


Tattoo hipster, perhaps?  Liked tattooing before it was cool, yo!  Now all these young pricks, they just doin' it because everybody else is doin' it.  Damned kids.
2013-08-21 09:02:50 PM  
1 votes:

Mambo Bananapatch: FTA:

"Besides civil liberties advocates and the tattoo industry clearly opposing a law, which would cripple self-expression..."

Because if you can't get a screw in your forehead, that's it for self-expression. Not a word will be heard by anyone in the state after this...


Of course not, there will be plenty of self expression, all done within the confines of what the state deems acceptable. You have the unfettered freedom to select between Self Expression A, Self Expression B, or Self Expression C. Only a Commie would need any more than that.
2013-08-21 08:40:56 PM  
1 votes:

skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.


You're the one coming across as a douchebag, buddy.  (does not and will not ever get a tattoo)
2013-08-21 08:25:45 PM  
1 votes:
I'm sure it's been said already, but introducing a bill /= Arkansas is banning. Just wanted to put that out there. My state's not that crazy.
2013-08-21 08:23:39 PM  
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: Specifically, Irvin's 387 bill would slap a state ban on scarification tattoos as well as dermal implants.

While I think both of these are just unbelievably stupid, I support any person's right to get one.


That's the thing - I think the state's doing something silly here. The state should be regulating those procedures, by charging a hefty licensing fee and using the proceeds of that fee to ensure compliance to appropriate standards. The state shouldn't be banning those procedures, especially as they can be done with a reasonable amount of safety by trained professionals. Someone's exploiting a "for the children" excuse, I think, to dodge the problem. The fun part is that this doesn't punish the recipients, just the practitioners - so, they're just driving revenue to other states as the recipients take a long drive to get their body art.

Washington state, for example, regulates scarification (as "body art") rather nicely under RCW 18.300. Complete a course on bloodborne pathogens, pay $250, and you can be licensed for body art, body piercing, tattooing, or permanent cosmetics in Washington.
2013-08-21 07:50:26 PM  
1 votes:
One: it's Arkansas, people...

Two: first higher court challenge will destroy the piercing amendment on constitutional grounds.

Three: it's Arkansas...

Four: some things need to be regulated, and with body mods, (tats, piercings and such) the risk for infection can be rather high, even after a sterile procedure, so why would you want to increase the risk by letting some drunk take a needle soaked in vodak to your body?

Five: need I say it again?

/tatted, pierced and working a real job.
//back to the office, maggot!
2013-08-21 07:43:51 PM  
1 votes:
So this is how the Republican "small government" works? Crushing small businesses and controlling what people do to their own bodies??

/why aren't these guys voted in everywhere???
2013-08-21 07:21:34 PM  
1 votes:
The government has a right to be involved. The government is charged with generally keeping you safe by KEEPING OTHER PEOPLE FROM HURTING YOU. An unlicensed tattoo giver isn't keeping you safe, he is endangering you by shoving non-sterile needles into your body. The government shouldn't say 'You can't get tattoo.' but should say 'You can't get unsafe tattoo.'

and as for the scarification and trans dermal implants- as long as it is fairly safe I don't see how they can ban it or how a full ban would possibly hold up. Put it this way- people can get breast implants for purely cosmetic reasons- and that is standard surgery, right? Pretty high chance of infection/problems. So maybe they make rules about what qualifications your tattoo artist must have, but they have set the bar pretty high for what cosmetic modifications you can get.
2013-08-21 07:05:32 PM  
1 votes:
::sigh::


Do your research, people.

The offending bill was amended upon reaching the House, and subsequently made less invasive in its final form.
checks and balances works!
2013-08-21 06:55:18 PM  
1 votes:
Don't go to uncle bob, then. In Kentucky, we're scrutinized properly, from tests to ensure that your sterilization equipment is in working order down to what color leather your chairs are, and the health department's rating has to be placed where the patrons can clearly see. Most shops, as is likely the case with salons, get most business by word of mouth, so running a filthy shop equates to running the shop into the ground. I'm sure a stylist or barber needs to keep a clean shop, but the scrutiny which a tattoo and piercing studio undergoes is marginally higher, as "jabbing people with needles or poking holes in a body" should be. We renew our licenses as frequently as we're required, and making sure customers are healthy and happy is paramount. Thank you.
2013-08-21 06:54:47 PM  
1 votes:
Scarification is not a tattoo and dermal implants are stupid. So who cares.
2013-08-21 06:46:51 PM  
1 votes:
fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net
2013-08-21 06:37:32 PM  
1 votes:

TexanBoy: You know, you may not agree with it, but damned if it isn't their right to vote that way and get it passed in their state. It was obviously important to enough people there to go through, so you should abide by it even if you disagree with it. Unless you're a filthy statist that thinks state's rights are meaningless.


No one is saying that passing idiotic laws that will get shredded in federal court as unconstitutional is exercising a right they don't have. No one.

What everyone is saying is that it's a waste of time and money and addresses no real issues and will be shredded in federal court.

So I guess you won the imaginary argument pretty effectively but not, as yet, the actual discussion.
2013-08-21 06:27:49 PM  
1 votes:

TexanBoy: You know, you may not agree with it, but damned if it isn't their right to vote that way and get it passed in their state. It was obviously important to enough people there to go through, so you should abide by it even if you disagree with it. Unless you're a filthy statist that thinks state's rights are meaningless.


Is it really their right to outlaw something that seems so obviously free-speechy, though?
2013-08-21 06:15:55 PM  
1 votes:
One of those "small government" states, I see.
2013-08-21 06:06:42 PM  
1 votes:

skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.


A lot of bites! Ten for ten. Bravo!
2013-08-21 05:54:59 PM  
1 votes:

skinink: First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.


This, from someone named 'skin ink.'
2013-08-21 05:53:15 PM  
1 votes:
THIS IS NOT HOW SMALL GOVERNMENT WORKS.
2013-08-21 05:51:00 PM  
1 votes:
First of all, if you're looking at the tattoo epidemic as a way to express your individualism, then it is obvious to me that you don't know the meaning of the word. How can you truly show any type of individualism by taking part in a movement that encompasses thousands, if not millions, of people? At this point, no matter how hard you try, you cannot get a tattoo that someone doesn't already have. The idea that somehow scarring your flesh with some insipid symbol or demonic imagery will say to people you're a free thinker is truly misguided. The issue lies with your own personal self-esteem.

If you're a person who feels a desire to tattoo himself, you're one of two types of people. The first group is drawn to tattooing because of a lack of self-respect and a love for themselves and for who they are, which causes these feelings to manifest. "If I had a cool tattoo, maybe then girls will notice me." Or "If I get a tattoo, guys will think I'm sexy." Once the root of the action is realized as being that of a desperate ploy for attention due to not appreciating themselves for who they are, and that they are placing that needed feeling of acceptance in the hands of others, the true motivations become clear.

Another personality type is the person who thinks way too much of themselves. The idea that someone may not notice them is unacceptable. They're awesome. A demi-god among us. This sad delusional state almost always manifests in over adornment. Be it tattoos, gold jewelry or outlandish silly outfits. However, all of this is just the wrapping to a package of arrogance, self-centeredness and an inflating feeling of self-importance commonly known as being a douchbag.
2013-08-21 05:48:54 PM  
1 votes:
Alright, so here's the thing.  This article is sourcing the original version of the bill.  The version that passed was filled with amendments that were put in place with the help of body modification professionals.  A friend of mine worked with government and had this to say after the bill passed:

Friends in Arkansas.. the legislation we worked on goes into place today. What this means for you:

Piercing guns are now illegal (class A misdemeanor per offense) to use on any part of the body other than the earlobe. This includes the cartilage of the ear, and yes that means Walmart, Claire's, etc are NOT permitted to pierce the cartilage of the ear.

It is illegal to sell piercing and tattoo supplies to the public. This means places like tattoo shopping marts, pawn shops, etc are committing a class A misdemeanor per sale they make.

All body art is limited to 16 year of age and up. It is illegal to perform any body piercing, tattoo, etc on a person under 16 with the exception of piercing the lobe of the ear.

Studios MUST use jewelry that meets ASTM requirements as implant grade and have Mill Test Certificates to prove it or jewelry as listed by the Health Department as acceptable for initial piercing (certain types of gold, niobium, glass, etc). This means if you go to a studio that uses externally threaded jewelry, they are very likely using jewelry which is banned.

The Department of Health has listed these as violations which can result in closing of the studio. If you are aware of violations occurring, please do your part and report it to the Department of Health in Little Rock. Violations of the first three may be reported to your local law enforcement as they are punishable as a class A misdemeanor or higher offense. Help us make local and state agencies realize that we will not let the hard work it took to get these laws in place go unenforced. Make the state do their job.


TLDR:  The linked article is a fluff fear-mongering piece that was written without actually reading the final bill.  There is NO ban on tattooing, scarification, branding or piercing.
2013-08-21 05:43:43 PM  
1 votes:
Sounds like someone is thinking of Arkansans' employability, even if they won't.
2013-08-21 05:40:59 PM  
1 votes:
"Irvin's 387 bill would slap a state ban on scarification tattoos as well as dermal implants."

So, not tattoos.
2013-08-21 04:48:33 PM  
1 votes:
Looks like they're only prohibiting sub-dermal implants. The rest of the bill looks to be pretty reasonable.

It mostly codifies artist apprenticeships.

The Bill
2013-08-21 04:38:36 PM  
1 votes:
But Jesus had piercings!

/hands.  feet.  ...
/me.  going.  to.  hell.
2013-08-21 04:19:02 PM  
1 votes:
Specifically, Irvin's 387 bill would slap a state ban on scarification tattoos as well as dermal implants.

While I think both of these are just unbelievably stupid, I support any person's right to get one.
2013-08-21 04:06:04 PM  
1 votes:
Laser like focus
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report