Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate

[rocket88]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

 

[Nynaeve Meara]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

Seems pretty in line with what the south wants; if its what the people want (if it goes to a public election) then it should pass otherwise it shouldn't just be legislated.

 

[tererun]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

yes, the party of smaller government and personal rights strikes again. It is great how republicans bitch and moan about a nanny state and then show us the only reason they are complaining is because they simply do not want the democrats doing their job. of course they really should think of what they are doing. How the hell are you supposed to practice your second amendment right of getting a gun implant when they won't allow implantation?

 

[americanwoman]

:shock:

Come on folks less more government is a good thing, right? Or no? What do we want, more or less? I'm so confused! :2razz:

 

[rocket88]

Seems pretty in line with what the south wants; if its what the people want (if it goes to a public election) then it should pass otherwise it shouldn't just be legislated.

They shouldn't legislate it at all. Personal rights, like the right to your own body.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

All these people reacting and neither the posted source nor the referenced source has the actual text of the bill.

That said, I don't see that these will be banned, just that the procedures are not allowed to be performed in the state. The state as I understand it does have the power through licensure to control such procedures. Even beauticians have licenses in most states that I'm aware.

I personally think they look crappy, but as long as it is done in a safe manner, I don't care if people want swastika tattoos on their forehead.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Personally, I could care less how a person defaces their own body, if that's what they choose to do - Would I bastardize my nose like Michael Jackson did? Hell no. Would I turn my skin into a walking billboard? Hell no. Would I ban others from doing it? Hell no.

I'm not even sure I'd have a caveat for hate speech or gang symbols, although I find those detestable. But then I find lots of things detestable in a free society - but nothing as detestable as a society where freedom doesn't exist.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

Banning supply will not significantly reduce demand, simply make the banned good/service go "off grid", move to a neighboring jurisdiction, yeild higher prices/profit and deprive the local gov't of any level of control or taxation now present. This was tried with for alcohol (and other recreational drugs), gambling and abortion with terrible results. Those that would ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

The fact that the bill never passed was ignored. Many bad ideas get proposed in bills, fortunatley most do not pass. Many in gov't now see the role of the state as to protect us from ourselves. Hopefully elections will have consequences and those that introduced or sponsored this moronic nanny statism idea will soon loose their jobs; if not, then AK deserves what its morons in their gov't attempt to do to them.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Pffffft, so what. It will just go back underground.
Done in kitchens with no sterilization. Versus in a permited shop with licensed artists.

 

[TheNextEra]

Taking the article at its word, this would be an idiotic bill to pass.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

Banning supply will not significantly reduce demand, simply make the banned good/service go "off grid", move to a neighboring jurisdiction, yeild higher prices/profit and deprive the local gov't of any level of control or taxation now present. This was tried with for alcohol (and other recreational drugs), gambling and abortion with terrible results. Those that would ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

The fact that the bill never passed was ignored. Many bad ideas get proposed in bills, fortunatley most do not pass. Many in gov't now see the role of the state as to protect us from ourselves. Hopefully elections will have consequences and those that introduced or sponsored this moronic nanny statism idea will soon loose their jobs; if not, then AK deserves what its morons in their gov't attempt to do to them.

Isnt that the same argument used for abortions?

 

[Nynaeve Meara]

They shouldn't legislate it at all. Personal rights, like the right to your own body.

I can get behind that.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Taking the article at its word, this would be an idiotic bill to pass.

Like most.

 

[tech30528]

Pure idiocy. The government should not be the ones to determine how people want to make themselves ineligible for jobs. How are we, as employers, supposed to determine just how poor the judgment of an applicant is? It's not like we're allowed to ask them...

 

[Arbo]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

Both of the two big parties, destroying freedom on a daily basis.

 

[OscarB63]

Pffffft, so what. It will just go back underground.
Done in kitchens with no sterilization. Versus in a permited shop with licensed artists.

when I was on active duty, I once saw a guy give himself a tattoo using drafting ink and a freakin compass

 

[Mycroft]

1. AR is making a mistake with this legislation. Governments should not be determining what adults do with their own bodies.

2. AR has the right to implement this legislation from a state's rights point of view. I would be totally against the federal government enacting such legislation.

3. Trying to make this a commentary on the policies or agenda of the Republican Party is, in my mind, the height of political hackishness.

4. Off-topic: I don't think I'll be considering beforeitsnews.com as a reliable news source any time soon since they really screwed the pooch on this story.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Government Wants to Ban Certain Tattoos and Piercings, Bill Passes in Senate | Alternative

It's the Arkansas Senate, not the US Senate. Good job keeping the government out of our private lives!

Not enough information to make an informed reply. The site also indicates it was passed in the State Senate 26 -4 but then "stalled" somehow, requiring another vote. Perhaps the Arkansas State Legislature has two houses and the "lower" house is balking?

Also, the article has no information about the actual bill. Perhaps it bans this sort of thing for juveniles under a certain age, but not for adults? I can get behind a ban on minors getting tats and piercings.

Jumping to conlusions on so little information? Perhaps someone can locate more on the subject?

 

[rocket88]

Not enough information to make an informed reply. The site also indicates it was passed in the State Senate 26 -4 but then "stalled" somehow, requiring another vote. Perhaps the Arkansas State Legislature has two houses and the "lower" house is balking?

Also, the article has no information about the actual bill. Perhaps it bans this sort of thing for juveniles under a certain age, but not for adults? I can get behind a ban on minors getting tats and piercings.

Jumping to conlusions on so little information? Perhaps someone can locate more on the subject?

I'm not jumping to conclusions, I just wanted to throw it out there for comment. See who says what....

 

[Captain Adverse]

I'm not jumping to conclusions, I just wanted to throw it out there for comment. See who says what....

Sorry. I was referring to some of the comments posted in response, not your original post.

 

[dirtpoorchris]

America needs a new age, passive revolution. We need to put politicians in their place and show them that they serve us. Im starting to finally get fed up with the bull****.

 

[Paschendale]

The bill refers only to scarring types of tattoos and sub-dermal implants, both of which are quite dangerous. Especially scarring. Every tattoo or piercing on the girl in the article's picture would be perfectly legitimate.

This bill most likely would not meet first amendment scrutiny, but its purpose seems to actually be about safety, not censorship.

 

[rhinefire]

"I liked it better when we all dressed the same".

-Adolph Eichman

 

[tech30528]

Banning body modifications would just lead to back alley modifications. Why do they want to kill people?

 

[AliHajiSheik]

The bill refers only to scarring types of tattoos and sub-dermal implants, both of which are quite dangerous. Especially scarring. Every tattoo or piercing on the girl in the article's picture would be perfectly legitimate.

This bill most likely would not meet first amendment scrutiny, but its purpose seems to actually be about safety, not censorship.

Thank you for this information. In this case I do agree with the legislation.