statesman, we have drank together, and i am not at all trying to toss some salt on your game. But 70% of non-priors do not have tatts. I don't find offense with guys that do (one of my best skippers had one), but it isn't in any way the norm. That isn't really arguing anything other than to say that I don't believe it is as common as that.
I'm speaking anecdotally, don't have scientifically gathered statistics. I'm also counting tattoos period, not just ones that are visible in uniform. And I said URL Os, which includes priors. Either way, the number isn't as much the issue as is the fact that tattooing in all socioeconomic strata is increasing. The idea that officers don't get tattoos is well out of date.
@
Flash, I don't know why you would care, visible or covered. But as I said the topic of discussion was getting a tattoo (particularly of wings) on chest or back or something, the whole start of this had nothing to do with whether or not it was visible. Someone made the comment that officers don't get tattoos, I say thats outdated thinking.