Visible tattoos soon to be forbidden for Dallas police officers

Chris Kidd, says:

No offense to the chief, but there are still major issues with the DPD that need to be addressed before bringing up something this minor, in particular bringing up the pay scale to bring in and retain new officers, as most new recruits leave DPD within five years and head to the 'burbs for better pay, benefits and less idiocracy from the public.

Peter Stawicki, says:

Come on people. Tattoos do not look professional. We dont let the cops go out with coffee stains or egg droppings or donut crums on their uniforms. Why should we let their tweety bird tattoo or the naked girl on their arm show up. If you have neck tats - that to me just says your not bright enough to carry out law enforcement and you should be at a basement desk job (Sorry - I know thats offensive but it your stupid enough to have your wifes name, GF's name, mommas name, or your own name printed on your neck above your collar - I question your common sense)

Pavel Lishin, says:

As long as we're apologizing for offending the dumb and the ignorant, I apologize for pointing out that it's kind of ironic that you typed "your" instead of "you're" in your comment, and left off some possessive apostrophes as well.

In any case, poor decisions don't make someone stupid or incapable of serving their community as a police officer. Professionalism, or lack thereof, changes every decade. A long time ago, it would have been unheard of for a programmer to show up for work in a polo shirt; not too long ago it would seem ridiculous that someone can show up to an white-collar position wearing a T-shirt with <a href="http://www.angryyoungandpoor.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=&amp;idproduct=133539">a band name</a> on it. Tattoos are a pretty arbitrary way of deciding whether someone is professional or not.

Furthermore, if a cop spills coffee on himself, I would hope they stay on duty and do their job instead of rushing back to the police station to change.

Travis Bush, says:

I agree with Chris...don't those monkey have anything better to do?

Ashley Lyell, says:

I'm an accountant and I just got a tattoo on the inside of my wrist - and no, it's not tweety bird or anyone's name. I don't think of myself as any less professional, my boss couldn't care less, and if an investor or someone comes in to meet with us that I don't think would appreciate me having the tattoo, I can just put on a bracelet and no one's the wiser. Half of my coworkers would be screwed if visible tattoos were forbidden.

I agree that there are far more important issues to tackle than this one.

James Scott, says:

Just playing devil's advocate here - but - it's possible there have been issues where the DPD has received complaints about officers and their tattoos - or perhaps one officer went a little off the deep-end as far as questionable content of his/her tattoo (naked biker-chic perhaps?).

All I'm saying is that a police officer is a public official that servers the people of the city. While I (as well as most of you) could give a rat's arse about a cop having a tattoo - for everyone one of us, there's probably 10 more people (obviously Peter for one) with little more to worry about than complain to the city about this kind of stuff.

So, DPD can say they're not going to hire someone with tattoos (not feasible), or ask that the officers cover visible tattoos. Plus, this keeps them off the hook for having to give subjective opinions over what tattoos are deemed "offensive", or tweety bird.

I like to bash the city government just as much as the next guy, but I don't think this is quite as bad as other things going on.

alexander troup, says:

Yea after the tobacco tax,then the tattoo thing come's in, no more ink,..by Hewitt and Packard....we only give out tattoo bar codes from now on.....A/T, The blind lead the blind when it comes to running our time....

Scott Doyle, says:

Maybe it just drove the women too wild, a man in uniform rockin' a bad-boy twist with their tat.

I've never been a big tattoo guy, but if tatted person is (hopefully) willing to take a bullet for me I'm not one to judge.

AnnMarie Wilson, says:

Sorry, I agree with James here.

alexander troup, says:

Image is a hard thing to hide and create in the city of J.F.K, Belle Starr,Bonnie and Clyde and Rap gangster of the last 1990's, while some ink stains do create a label other image as are also symbols of a personal nature.....look at Sports Stars and their tattoos,

While the Roman gladiator had great tattoos...and criminal's on french colony Devils Island and the Mouera tribes of New Zeland and finally Ice man found in the Alps some years back 6,000 years old with tattoos...

Spick and Spam Dallas has to have this image that will affect the homeland....A/T,..Life is not a joke it is real ink...

Rawlins Gilliland, says:

Any law enforcement / public servant is supposed to be neutral per matters of appearance as is true in the military. That means, for instance, they cannot be wearing pins that identify their political beliefs, religious beliefs, etc. As for tattoos, they are allowed to HAVE tattoos, just not show them publicly. Which makes perfect sense.

One needs to pick their battles, and a uniform code of appearance is part of the standardization one should expect in law enforcement and military. In their private life, whatever goes. People need to remember to distinguish between their 'rights' and 'freedoms' as individuals vs. on the job when they represent something other than themselves, and in fact work for someone else.

It's like at schools, kids want to 'express themselves', charging their ‘rights’ are thwarted. That they want to dress as they choose. I do too. That's why I 1) Left the corporate world where I was expected to wear a suit and tie daily…no exceptions… and went for far less money to work for myself 2) And say to those kids who think they are being punished by wearing a uniform to school, “that’s what I loved about growing up to become an adult. Try it. You'll like it.”

Jason Rice, says:

Yet ANOTHER new 'do, AnnMarie?!?

Looks GREAT!

A uniform carries an authority. It should be respected both by the people it serves and the people serving.

Oh, and as a thoroughly non-tattooed individual: I don't put bumper stickers on my car, I don't WEAR political/corporate branding/team iconography, and I don't expect public servants to wave their individual politics in my face.

And yes, a tat is a statement of individuality.

That's why so many lemmings get them.