This is Dr. Dave Ores. He's had a medical practice in NYC for many years, and is also a member of a motorcycle club. You might see a thug, or lowlife, or whatever; I see a professional who likes having tattoos.
Don't judge a book by it's cover.
And if the American Medical Association had strict rules about doctors wearing tattoos and Dr. Dave Ores violated them, then he would be in trouble and would be sanctioned accordingly BUT THE AMA DOESN'T!!! Why would you bring up an example that has NOTHING to do with this thread? It's in response to a poster's question about an agency setting its own standards in a written policy and the "special" people that choose to violate them and what they're allowed to get away with. Don't like the rules? GTFO! Or better yet, don't apply in the first place.
Guest wrote:We have had issues with tattoos in the past. We all know about the Recruit in the Academy who was found to have gang tattoos which were, if I remember correctly recognized by a 10-49 gang investigator at Pat Thomas. However, the policy has changed and is strictly enforced now. Tattoos on the neck, head, elbows, wrists, hands or fingers are automatic disqualifications. They don't even get to PAT test if they have them.
, I guess The United States Armed Forces can have them just not the Florida Highway Patrol.
I guess they can...if their General Orders SAY they can! So maybe those mentioned in this thread should go join the United States Armed Forces, right, because our standards seem to be a bit higher? Even the "United States Armed Forces" have lowered their standards for hiring; there are many that would be accepted there that would NOT be accepted by the FHP so you had best find a better standard of comparison.
There are over 20,000 applications. We can afford to deny anybody for any reason. If you can't resist the urge to paint your body, go get a job as an art critic.
As for the doctor with tattoos, maybe I am just old school but if he is that unprofessional in his appearance I wouldn't expect him to be much of a doctor.
If you need backup or medical assistance, you should not care if the one coming to your aid has tattoos. If you do, then you are a fool.
Take your blinders off and look around at the world you've chosen to miss.
As long as an applicant is willing to come to your aid as a backup, we shouldn't have any standards for appearance or conduct? Anything goes and anybody should be able to wear a uniform and call themselves a Florida State Trooper? Who's the ignorant one?
If you need backup or medical assistance, you should not care if the one coming to your aid has tattoos. If you do, then you are a fool.
Take your blinders off and look around at the world you've chosen to miss.
As long as an applicant is willing to come to your aid as a backup, we shouldn't have any standards for appearance or conduct? Anything goes and anybody should be able to wear a uniform and call themselves a Florida State Trooper? Who's the ignorant one?
Actually, NOT. Perception is reality. If you look like a "thug," most folks will suspect that is your real personality and expect your ability and behavior to be influenced adversely by the appearance. Most people prefer to be "served" by someone who "looks professional."
Then all of you can go piss up a rope. My tats are a part of me, like them or not. I wear the uniform just fine, thank you. I never said there shouldn't be any standards; I'm saying that the standards are based on the PERSON, not the appearance of tats.
By the way, some of the best LEO's I've ever met don't look like the image FHP holds in such high regards. Image is not everything, contrary to FHP's ridiculous mentality. They might be judged as "thugs" or "lowlifes", but are in fact the very people you want on your side. They are the first to jump in and save your ass, and the last to leave when the shit has hit the fan.
Of course, anyone with tats of swastikas, 88's, or any other gang/hate symbols are unacceptable. However, that is based on the CRIMINAL and HATE nature of the person, who also decided to very stupidly advertise it...but again, that is what the background investigation is for.
A doctor with a caduceus and other medical symbols tattooed on his body is fine, just as our servicemen, police officers, and firefighters display tattoos of their profession. Tattoos displaying religious beliefs, history, family, heritage, etc. are fully acceptable, and should not be judged based upon one's dislike of tattoos or predisposed bias against them.
Guest wrote:We have had issues with tattoos in the past. We all know about the Recruit in the Academy who was found to have gang tattoos which were, if I remember correctly recognized by a 10-49 gang investigator at Pat Thomas. However, the policy has changed and is strictly enforced now. Tattoos on the neck, head, elbows, wrists, hands or fingers are automatic disqualifications. They don't even get to PAT test if they have them.
, I guess The United States Armed Forces can have them just not the Florida Highway Patrol.
A lot of criminals were given the option of going to prison or the United States Armed Forces.
I'm a recruiter, and you cannot have tats on your neck whatsoever.
Guest wrote:We have had issues with tattoos in the past. We all know about the Recruit in the Academy who was found to have gang tattoos which were, if I remember correctly recognized by a 10-49 gang investigator at Pat Thomas. However, the policy has changed and is strictly enforced now. Tattoos on the neck, head, elbows, wrists, hands or fingers are automatic disqualifications. They don't even get to PAT test if they have them.
, I guess The United States Armed Forces can have them just not the Florida Highway Patrol.
I guess they can...if their General Orders SAY they can! So maybe those mentioned in this thread should go join the United States Armed Forces, right, because our standards seem to be a bit higher? Even the "United States Armed Forces" have lowered their standards for hiring; there are many that would be accepted there that would NOT be accepted by the FHP so you had best find a better standard of comparison.
The armed forces have actually raised their standards very high, we are cutting down a lot, no more GED, asvab scores must be at least a 50, and no more taking persons with arrest, traffic etc
Well of course they can't have them...they're the two gayest branches!
Unless your a military vet or serving active or reserve. YOU DONT KNOW WTH youre talking about. I would encourage you to go tell a Marine or a Coastie that. Especially those that have served abroad in foreign lands. Their are several in this agency and elsewhere. I can assure you a are not going to like the reply you get.
