I have one. My avatar is mine. I was just curious and wanted to see some of the other art work done based on warhammer 40k. It's just something that I honestly havent seen or heard much of.

My brother has a purple/blue chaos star on his left shoulder

Snowman90 wrote:I have one. My avatar is mine. I was just curious and wanted to see some of the other art work done based on warhammer 40k. It's just something that I honestly havent seen or heard much of.

Did you earn that Crux Terminatus?

That might be heresy.

Is that your arm? Might i suggest getting out into the sunshine a little more frequently?

I know a guy who has a terminator tattooed on his wrist. Funny thing is, he dosent even play 40k

Darrian13 wrote:Is that your arm? Might i suggest getting out into the sunshine a little more frequently?

I thought that was like a semi-rolled up piece of paper until reading the description

metallifan wrote:

Darrian13 wrote:Is that your arm? Might i suggest getting out into the sunshine a little more frequently?

I thought that was like a semi-rolled up piece of paper until reading the description

He's called snowman, ofcourse his arm is going to like rolled up paper

metallifan wrote:

Darrian13 wrote:Is that your arm? Might i suggest getting out into the sunshine a little more frequently?

I thought that was like a semi-rolled up piece of paper until reading the description

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones...or in your case, massive 1 ton boulders

OnT
I do not have a WH tattoo but I can definelty see how it might offer some nice motives. Looks like a work well dont

The owner of my FLGS has a Blood Angels tattoo, has had it for about ten years now. I will see if I can remember to get a pic.

A friend of mine has an Eldar symbol tatooes to him. It's the one that's supposed to be "The Ultimate Swear word" or something to that effect.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:A friend of mine has an Eldar symbol tatooes to him. It's the one that's supposed to be "The Ultimate Swear word" or something to that effect.

Damn those eldar and thier hightend emotions. oooh we got a better swear word than you.

Actually its my leg. And that's what happens when you wear jeans year round.

my legs must be dirty then.

Inb4GWsueandattackyouwithacheesegrater:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&pageMode=multi&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=3&aId=3900002&start=4

T-shirts, Clothes, Tatoos and the Like

As always, we cannot allow third parties to obtain money from our intellectual property.

This effectively means that you would either have to buy Games Workshop T-shirts or clothes or make them yourself. You would not be able to sell any t-shirts or clothes that you make.

This also means that we cannot allow tattoos as an acceptable use of our IP as a third party necessarily has to perform the "service."

Automatically Appended Next Post:

nickmund wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:A friend of mine has an Eldar symbol tatooes to him. It's the one that's supposed to be "The Ultimate Swear word" or something to that effect.

Damn those eldar and thier hightend emotions. oooh we got a better swear word than you.

And we have a better one than them.

Belgium.

nickmund wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:A friend of mine has an Eldar symbol tatooes to him. It's the one that's supposed to be "The Ultimate Swear word" or something to that effect.

Damn those eldar and thier hightend emotions. oooh we got a better swear word than you.

Yes, only by living through 100 different paths of life can you truly understand how offensive my F-Bomb is!

tedurur wrote:

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones...or in your case, massive 1 ton boulders

That would be true, if I had any imperfections to speak of. But that's life when you're the pinnacle of human evolution

Gwar! wrote:This effectively means that you would either have to buy Games Workshop T-shirts or clothes or make them yourself. You would not be able to sell any t-shirts or clothes that you make.
This also means that we cannot allow tattoos as an acceptable use of our IP as a third party necessarily has to perform the "service."

Haha, so not only does it make you a douche, it's also technically illegal?

Silly GW.

Like anyone obeys copyright law....

kill dem stunties wrote:Like anyone obeys copyright law....

Yareally. Like, look at Blizzard suing that chick $18M for breaching copyright. Psh. Like the thought of an $18M lawsuit is going to deter anyone.

Eh. I have trouble reconciling breaking any law based on the fact that "durr, this tattoo will look cool bro."

I mean, if you're going to break a law, have a good reason for it.

You've got a gun to your head, and if you don't steal that car, you're a dead man? Fine.

You wanna get a totally rockin' tattoo? Not so much.

Look what you've done Gwar!

I briefly considered getting the Imperial Aquila as a tattoo, until I found out the price would be around $240 and also looks quite a bit like the Nazi/German eagle from a short distance away...>_>
So, it's either a Punisher (Plain Jane) skull on the shoulder, Inquisition seals on my fingers, a Khorne symbol on my wrist, or all three.
I don't need all this damn skin anyway.

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:Inquisition seals on my fingers

Now that's a badass idea.

Finger tattoos (and neck/face/head ones for that matter) do have an unfortunate side-effect on your career options: bouncer, barkeep, trucker, hobo, or an artisté of some sort (i.e. hobo).

I want a tattoo of kharne.

I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:A friend of mine has an Eldar symbol tatooes to him. It's the one that's supposed to be "The Ultimate Swear word" or something to that effect.

Barrera Streisand?

Captain Godfrey wrote:I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

If I saw someone with these tattoos, I'd have to laugh my ass off.

No offense, but that's so incredibly cheesy. I could sort of see it for someone in the armed forces, but even then it's kind of douchebaggy.

Terminus wrote:

Captain Godfrey wrote:I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

If I saw someone with these tattoos, I'd have to laugh my ass off.

No offense, but that's so incredibly cheesy. I could sort of see it for someone in the armed forces, but even then it's kind of douchebaggy.

If this gentleman is in the Armed Forces, I'd appreciate the meaning of the "HONOR" and "DUTY" bits.

Regardless of whether or not this gentleman is in the Armed Forces, I wouldn't be able to avoid laughing at the Blood Angels insignia.

Terminus wrote:

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:Inquisition seals on my fingers

Now that's a badass idea.

Finger tattoos (and neck/face/head ones for that matter) do have an unfortunate side-effect on your career options: bouncer, barkeep, trucker, hobo, or an artisté of some sort (i.e. hobo).

...What the hell's a career?!
Hell, I've always wanted an armed forces/PMC/shootin' stuff related job anyway...


Also, I've seen a bunch of 40k tattoos online, but not really any WFB ones.
Are they out there at all?

SaintHazard wrote:

Terminus wrote:

Captain Godfrey wrote:I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

If I saw someone with these tattoos, I'd have to laugh my ass off.

No offense, but that's so incredibly cheesy. I could sort of see it for someone in the armed forces, but even then it's kind of douchebaggy.

If this gentleman is in the Armed Forces, I'd appreciate the meaning of the "HONOR" and "DUTY" bits.

Regardless of whether or not this gentleman is in the Armed Forces, I wouldn't be able to avoid laughing at the Blood Angels insignia.

Being in the army, I think it'd be funnier (in a good way) to just get tatooed "KILL MAIM BURN" xD

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:Also, I've seen a bunch of 40k tattoos online, but not really any WFB ones.
Are they out there at all?

Other than this one?

Sadly, as the ink fades and the skin wrinkles and falls to gravity, such an amazing tatoo will look stupid... at best.

Captain Godfrey wrote:I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

Are you also tattooing your nipples gold?

Shas'O Dorian wrote:

Captain Godfrey wrote:I wanted Blood Angels blood drop with wings on my right shoulder, and DUTY on my left Forearm, and HONOR on my right.

Are you also tattooing your nipples gold?

He's got a couple hundred more years to go before he's earned his gold nipples.

Before the days of even discovering what 40k even was I've always had a winged sword as my own personal iconography, so I shall likely be getting a DA-esque tattoo on my left arm, may even throw in a knight in robes of some sort, kind of like the Angels Sanguine banner.

this whole idea takes geek to a new level... sorry.

Playing the game doesn't make you a geek.

getting a tatoo? yes, it is. it's like getting a womans name tatooed onto your arm. what happens if you give up?

Captain Solon wrote:what happens if you give up?

You start claiming that "Mary" was your buddy in the Navy, and if we'd gone through what you two went through, we'd understand.

And "FOR THE EMPEROR!!" was the name of our ship.

I know a guy who plays ogres for WHFB and got a Maw tattoo on his belly.



i always considered, if i ever got a tat, it would be a Crux terminatus.

GW couldn't sue over that as Maltese crosses are public domain.

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:

Terminus wrote:

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:Inquisition seals on my fingers

Now that's a badass idea.
Finger tattoos (and neck/face/head ones for that matter) do have an unfortunate side-effect on your career options: bouncer, barkeep, trucker, hobo, or an artisté of some sort (i.e. hobo).

...What the hell's a career?!
Hell, I've always wanted an armed forces/PMC/shootin' stuff related job anyway...

I don't know about other countries, but you'll have a hard time getting in any U.S. armed forces with any visible tattoos when in uniform (i.e. mostly hands and above the collar of the uniform). I think the Army recently changed their policy to be a little more relaxed (they need more meat for the grinder), but even then it has quite a few limitations and is judged on a case-by-case basis.

insaniak wrote:

Lord_Inquisitor wrote:Also, I've seen a bunch of 40k tattoos online, but not really any WFB ones.
Are they out there at all?

Other than this one?

That tattoo rocks.

SaintHazard wrote:Eh. I have trouble reconciling breaking any law based on the fact that "durr, this tattoo will look cool bro."

In other news, SaintHazard has never downloaded an MP3, ripped the tag off a mattress, or rebroadcast major league baseball with implied oral consent.

Ouze wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Eh. I have trouble reconciling breaking any law based on the fact that "durr, this tattoo will look cool bro."

In other news, SaintHazard has never downloaded an MP3, ripped the tag off a mattress, or rebroadcast major league baseball with implied oral consent.

I also don't speed, run red lights, perform rolling stops at stopsigns, or get drunk in public.

What's your point?

Also, the person who has the tattoo hasn't broken any laws...

Alpharius wrote:Also, the person who has the tattoo hasn't broken any laws...

No, the person who gave them the tattoo has. But I think paying someone to break a law FOR you is just as reprehensible as breaking the law yourself - and makes you equally culpable. At least in the U.S. I have no idea how it works anywhere else.

I think a purity seal with a real littany on the little danglies would be a very cool tatoo. Wouldn't have to be big either.

Gitsplitta wrote:I think a purity seal with a real littany on the little danglies would be a very cool tatoo. Wouldn't have to be big either.

That one would be legal, because "Purity Seals" are as much GW IP as I own the patent for the Teapot.

And I suspect you could find some great things for the littany out of classical literature that would be entirely applicable, so you wouldn't run into copyright issues either. (I'm talking stuff so old that there is no copyright issue any more.)

make something up that is close enough and GW could never prove infringment as strip of parchment with fancy writing on them affixed with wax isn't anything new.

Moot point too, as GW will never go after this sort of thing...

Ink away!

Alpharius wrote:Moot point too, as GW will never go after this sort of thing...

Ink away!

...and that makes it right? I agree that if you make it ambiguous enough there's no way GW can sue, as they don't own the copyright, but just because GW won't go after minor cases of copyright infringement doesn't make it okay to actually break copyright law.

I mean, by your logic, I can go to the grocery store and steal some donuts, because as long as I run fast enough, they won't come after me, right?

What about going into a pawn shop and stealing a hunting rifle? If they can't chase me down or identify me, it's alright, right?

I have a Deff Skwadron one (ork skull in flying cap biting a bomb with the allocade "DEFF SKWADRON" around it). It makes me a proud nerd, and if 'em GW-guys are gonna complain about it, I'll travel over there and cut the damn skin of my arm in front of Jervis!

SaintHazard wrote:I mean, by your logic, I can go to the grocery store and steal some donuts, because as long as I run fast enough, they won't come after me, right?

Copyright infringement is not analogous to theft, no matter what Big Media would like to believe: They've already swung and missed on that one. Ref Dowling vs RIAA (1985)

The shorthand for this is that when you download a MP3, the rightful owner still has that music. It wasn't stolen, it was unlawfully copied. So your donut analogy is baseless. A better example would be if he went to the grocery store and made an exact copy of one of their donuts, in which the store still had 100% of their property afterward.

Except that 1) it's much harder to define the "original copy" with digital media than it is with a physical object like a donut, and 2) it is much easier to copy a file than it is to copy a donut.

The point is, you can spin copyright law anyway you want, but it doesn't make breaking it morally defensible. Regardless of what some nerd with too much free time tries to tell you.

Just buy the goddamn music. A few dollars isn't going to break you.

SaintHazard wrote:Except that 1) it's much harder to define the "original copy" with digital media than it is with a physical object like a donut, and 2) it is much easier to copy a file than it is to copy a donut.

The point is, you can spin copyright law anyway you want, but it doesn't make breaking it morally defensible. Regardless of what some nerd with too much free time tries to tell you.

Just buy the goddamn music. A few dollars isn't going to break you.

Well it might, but thats far less likely than *not* hearing the latest <insert artist name here> song.

I just *really* want there to be a wide take up on digital distribution for films, as there has been for music and games.

The movie companies seem more keen on making money from the problem than attempting to fix it.

This topic started off cool and has now gone into the realm of non-sense. Leave it to us (40k gamers) to take a simple question of "anyone have/seen 40k tattoos?" and turn it into a rules lawyer argument.

we love our rules.

OverwatchCNC wrote:This topic started off cool and has now gone into the realm of non-sense. Leave it to us (40k gamers) to take a simple question of "anyone have/seen 40k tattoos?" and turn it into a rules lawyer argument.

I don't think you quite understand: someone was wrong on the internet.

WOW!! Some of you guys never cease to amaze me with your ability to argue over things that you obviously have no knowledge of. That said, having been a professional tattoo artist for over 20 years, and having dealt with the copyright issue on a number of occasions (Disney), here's the breakdown on it. As long as the artist or shop doesn't offer/provide the images which are being tattooed, there is NO copyright infringement, since we are not profitting from thier IP, but from our services. It's the same as if you walked up to a pay here copying machine & copied a picture out of WD to hang on your wall. The copying machine owner wouldn't be in trouble because all it did was perform a service, just like the tattoo artist. You are paying them for the service, not for the image. That makes ALL of the difference in the world when it comes down to it. We sell 'flash sets' (design sheets, for those of you not in the biz) and retain all copyrights to those sheets. This means that if you buy a set from me, you are allowed to hang it on your wall for customers to check out and you are also allowed to reproduce those images through the medium of tattooing. You are not allowed to go to Kinko's, make a bunch of copies and resell them for profit or have my designs printed on t-shirts that you will sell. It can be a bit confusing, but that is the long and short of it. A few years back, Disney went afte a guy who was tattooed with ALL of the Disney characters for copyright infringement. They lost. Then they lost some more, because he sued them for all of his legal expenses, etc.. If Disney can't make it happen, no one can!

As far as GW tattoos go, I've done a bunch of them. Everything from Asmodai (from the cover of WD) to Chaos warriors, Necron runes and names in Tau. I'll dig up some pics and put 'em up, if anyones interested.

SaintHazard wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Also, the person who has the tattoo hasn't broken any laws...

No, the person who gave them the tattoo has. But I think paying someone to break a law FOR you is just as reprehensible as breaking the law yourself - and makes you equally culpable. At least in the U.S. I have no idea how it works anywhere else.

Meh, you're sounding like law is an unchallegeable monolith entity that should be obeyed at all costs even at the expense of common sense. Laws change quite frequently for a reason.

Terminus wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Also, the person who has the tattoo hasn't broken any laws...

No, the person who gave them the tattoo has. But I think paying someone to break a law FOR you is just as reprehensible as breaking the law yourself - and makes you equally culpable. At least in the U.S. I have no idea how it works anywhere else.

Meh, you're sounding like law is an unchallegeable monolith entity that should be obeyed at all costs even at the expense of common sense. Laws change quite frequently for a reason.

Toss up a picture of your law degree and I'll agree that you're qualified to make that decision. Until then, you're not, and neither am I.

SaintHazard wrote:Toss up a picture of your law degree and I'll agree that you're qualified to make that decision. Until then, you're not, and neither am I.

Then why do you keep doing so?

Ouze wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Toss up a picture of your law degree and I'll agree that you're qualified to make that decision. Until then, you're not, and neither am I.

Then why do you keep doing so?

I'm not. I'm obeying the law.

Once you've gone through law school, you're qualified to decide whether or not a particular law is just. You can make an informed decision if you want to ignore a law. You may still be shooting yourself in the foot, but at least you can look at it objectively.

Well, I've already spent more time in college than I should have (and I have 2 Master's degrees that I don't use to prove it), so I'll pass on going to law school and just take the word of my business attorney (he went to law school AND passed the bar exam!) who broke it down for me exactly the way I broke it down for all of you.

WOW!! It only took a little under 3 pages for this to go off topic by a mile! I hope that's not some sort of record.......

SaintHazard wrote:

Ouze wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Toss up a picture of your law degree and I'll agree that you're qualified to make that decision. Until then, you're not, and neither am I.

Then why do you keep doing so?

I'm not. I'm obeying the law.

Once you've gone through law school, you're qualified to decide whether or not a particular law is just. You can make an informed decision if you want to ignore a law. You may still be shooting yourself in the foot, but at least you can look at it objectively.

How I look at it, we're people. People do messed up things. When your in a world of killing, raping, stealing, and theft who honestly cares about copyright? In my opinion it's not a big deal. Why are you so hell bent on making other people see everything EXACTLY how you see it? People are people. We can make are own decisions. For every action there is a equal and opposite reaction. Aren't people allowed to make their own actions, not based on what you, or anyone for that matter, says? If I wanted to go get a white power tattoo and shave my mustache into a hitler-stash wouldn't I be allowed to do that even if tons of people would hold it against me?

Freedom of expression /= breaking the law.

SaintHazard wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Moot point too, as GW will never go after this sort of thing...

Ink away!

...and that makes it right? I agree that if you make it ambiguous enough there's no way GW can sue, as they don't own the copyright, but just because GW won't go after minor cases of copyright infringement doesn't make it okay to actually break copyright law.

I mean, by your logic, I can go to the grocery store and steal some donuts, because as long as I run fast enough, they won't come after me, right?

What about going into a pawn shop and stealing a hunting rifle? If they can't chase me down or identify me, it's alright, right?

Supermarket security worker here - we'd come after you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

J'santai Khan wrote:WOW!! Some of you guys never cease to amaze me with your ability to argue over things that you obviously have no knowledge of. That said, having been a professional tattoo artist for over 20 years, and having dealt with the copyright issue on a number of occasions (Disney), here's the breakdown on it. As long as the artist or shop doesn't offer/provide the images which are being tattooed, there is NO copyright infringement, since we are not profitting from thier IP, but from our services. It's the same as if you walked up to a pay here copying machine & copied a picture out of WD to hang on your wall. The copying machine owner wouldn't be in trouble because all it did was perform a service, just like the tattoo artist. You are paying them for the service, not for the image. That makes ALL of the difference in the world when it comes down to it. We sell 'flash sets' (design sheets, for those of you not in the biz) and retain all copyrights to those sheets. This means that if you buy a set from me, you are allowed to hang it on your wall for customers to check out and you are also allowed to reproduce those images through the medium of tattooing. You are not allowed to go to Kinko's, make a bunch of copies and resell them for profit or have my designs printed on t-shirts that you will sell. It can be a bit confusing, but that is the long and short of it. A few years back, Disney went afte a guy who was tattooed with ALL of the Disney characters for copyright infringement. They lost. Then they lost some more, because he sued them for all of his legal expenses, etc.. If Disney can't make it happen, no one can!

As far as GW tattoos go, I've done a bunch of them. Everything from Asmodai (from the cover of WD) to Chaos warriors, Necron runes and names in Tau. I'll dig up some pics and put 'em up, if anyones interested.

I'm interested

I am interested in your business address so I can report you to the proper authorities get a tattoo.

EDIT- I didn't get the joke.

Awww, I missed the flamerant.

I'm currently in South Florida. Be sure and bring an army or 2! We'll play some 40K, do some finshing and then we'll talk about tattoos! LOL!!

Gwar! wrote:Awww, I missed the flamerant.

It was more like me agreeing with the legal guy above you, I don't have the balls to flame on this forum.

mmm I want a DA-esque tattoo but can't quite decide what to have!

Just to throw my two penneth into the ring:

I could see it being a problem if you tattoed the GW logo and then got another tattoo underneath that said "sucks" or "is overpriced" but how on earth is having a tattoo done of the Blood Angels insignia or something similar doing any harm to anyone? It's not as if 9/10 people will even recognise it let alone comment on it and there's sure as hell no way it'll fall into "common usage" resulting in GW losing their copyright!

I will admit my DA style tattoo will not be GW IP for the following reasons:

I'd like it to be fairly unique
I want 40k players to know I play DA
I don't want to have to "explain" to anyone what 40k and Dark Angels are in 10 years time lol

I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

"Ink poisoning"?

As someone who has several tattoos, I can tell you now there is no such thing (unless he uses Lead based inks or something stupid like that).

The reason why you can't give blood is because back when the rules were made, tattoo places were not beacons of hygiene. Coupled with the whole HIV epidemic and the possibility of transferring that and Hepatitis etc, they had to do so to prevent contamination of the blood.

Nowadays, real (as in, not some bloke with a nail in a back alley) tattoo parlours are cleaner than freaking hospitals.

So unless you have some sort of amazingly rare blood type (and even then, it has to be really special since they just use O in 99% of cases anyway) or have Blood type O and want to do a "good deed", there is no reason why not being able to give blood is a reason not to get a tattoo.

That being said, I am A+, no-one wants my blood. :(

Gwar! wrote:

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

"Ink poisoning"?

As someone who has several tattoos, I can tell you now there is no such thing (unless he uses Lead based inks or something stupid like that).

The reason why you can't give blood is because back when the rules were made, tattoo places were not beacons of hygiene. Coupled with the whole HIV epidemic and the possibility of transferring that and Hepatitis etc, they had to do so to prevent contamination of the blood.

Nowadays, real (as in, not some bloke with a nail in a back alley) tattoo parlours are cleaner than freaking hospitals.

So unless you have some sort of amazingly rare blood type (and even then, it has to be really special since they just use O in 99% of cases anyway) or have Blood type O and want to do a "good deed", there is no reason why not being able to give blood is a reason not to get a tattoo.

That being said, I am A+, no-one wants my blood. :(

What's more, here the law only stops you from donating just for a year after getting a tatoo or a piercing, since they assumed it to be a good caution period to see if you catched anything. After that,you're good to go and donate.

I'm pretty sure that's how it works here too Dark. And I only have the one tattoo, and it's not GW related . . . But it the Metallica Ninja Star . . . and therefore technically awesome =D

I want to get something else done though . . . just don't know what yet =p

Oshova

Oshova wrote:I'm pretty sure that's how it works here too Dark. And I only have the one tattoo, and it's not GW related . . . But it the Metallica Ninja Star . . . and therefore technically awesome =D

I want to get something else done though . . . just don't know what yet =p

Oshova

Heh, if I wasn't in the army (therebefore, can't have tatoos) I'd get a hransferki on my back.

the Swedish(is that the flag?) army doesn't allow tattoos?

Wierd

here you just can't be gay(which makes more sense, i wouldn't want some guy watching me in the locker room)

Grey Templar wrote:the Swedish(is that the flag?) army doesn't allow tattoos?

Wierd

here you just can't be gay(which makes more sense, i wouldn't want some guy watching me in the locker room)

Just because you are gay doesn't mean you go around groping everyone...

It doesn't make any sense at all. It's no different from banning Blacks and Whites serving together.

And that is an Argentinian Flag.

not too good with flags

and when your as hot as i am you worry about things like this.

I want an IG helmet tattooed on my head.

why not just get a real helmet from a surplus store for $5?

cheaper and won't look as silly

Grey Templar wrote:why not just get a real helmet from a surplus store for $5?

cheaper and won't look as silly

They would both give the same armor save though

SaintHazard wrote:

Ouze wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Toss up a picture of your law degree and I'll agree that you're qualified to make that decision. Until then, you're not, and neither am I.

Then why do you keep doing so?

I'm not. I'm obeying the law.

Once you've gone through law school, you're qualified to decide whether or not a particular law is just. You can make an informed decision if you want to ignore a law. You may still be shooting yourself in the foot, but at least you can look at it objectively.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever read on this forum, period. Ever. Actually, it may just be the stupidest thing I've ever read on the internet. I think I see reality collapsing all around us.

What the hell do you think they teach in law school? It's certainly not justice, at least not how you're implying. While I don't have a law degree, I took a bunch of courses undergrad and the LSAT (which I rocked, btw), and interviewed at a bunch of schools before I determined I preferred medicine. First year of law school is basically expanding on the skill-set tested by the LSAT: critical thinking, reading comprehension, case analysis (i.e. deciphering legal jargon), and research into precedent. The remaining year (or two) is spent focusing on particular areas of law (real estate, criminal defense, etc.), learning those particular rules and regulations. That's the didactic portion of law school; the remainder is filing paperwork and the ability to spin an argument in favor of your interpretation.

Whether something is just, or right vs. wrong, boils down to reason and personal ethics. A JD is certainly not a pre-requisite for being able to think clearly and have a sense of fairness. And you certainly don't need a JD to understand the law (I bet you I know more about pharmacy law than any lawyer who didn't specialized in it. I have a pretty damn good handle on my state's gun laws, as well.

+1 to Terminus. I'd quote for truth, but I'd rather not spam the chat.

Here's one of my tattoos.



It's a take on the Crux Terminatus seen on the old Space Hulk rule book. We added a Dark Angel emblem for some personal heraldry. We also added a scroll underneath it with "And They Shall Know No Fear" written on it.

Legal matters or not, it's still sick looking

edit: Fixed it so it's smaller.

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

No, you can't give blood... for one year afterwards. Tattooing can possibly introduce an infection underneath the skin, so the Red Cross will not allow donations. They will also not allow donations, for a time, for people who have had or been in contact with serious contagious diseases, like pneumonia. Also, for certain periods of time, if you lived outside of the US, you are permanently banned from ever giving blood.

That being said, most legitimate tattoo artists are cleaner than some doctor's offices I've been to. So stop worrying and if you want to get one, get one!

Has this thread veered off topic too far now?

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

No, you can't give blood... for one year afterwards. Tattooing can possibly introduce an infection underneath the skin, so the Red Cross will not allow donations. They will also not allow donations, for a time, for people who have had or been in contact with serious contagious diseases, like pneumonia. Also, for certain periods of time, if you lived outside of the US, you are permanently banned from ever giving blood.

That being said, most legitimate tattoo artists are cleaner than some doctor's offices I've been to. So stop worrying and if you want to get one, get one!

Has this thread veered off topic too far now?

You can give blood. The red cross called me. I explained to them I recently got a tattoo. They said, and I quote "As long as your tattoo was from a licensed artist you can give blood without complication." And that was just a few weeks ago.

oh wow... they must have changed it...

Snowman90 wrote:

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

No, you can't give blood... for one year afterwards. Tattooing can possibly introduce an infection underneath the skin, so the Red Cross will not allow donations. They will also not allow donations, for a time, for people who have had or been in contact with serious contagious diseases, like pneumonia. Also, for certain periods of time, if you lived outside of the US, you are permanently banned from ever giving blood.

That being said, most legitimate tattoo artists are cleaner than some doctor's offices I've been to. So stop worrying and if you want to get one, get one!

Has this thread veered off topic too far now?

You can give blood. The red cross called me. I explained to them I recently got a tattoo. They said, and I quote "As long as your tattoo was from a licensed artist you can give blood without complication." And that was just a few weeks ago.

Thanks for the clarification.

micahaphone wrote:

Snowman90 wrote:

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

micahaphone wrote:I don't think I'd ever be able to get a tattoo, because you can't give blood (in the USA) after you've gotten one, for ink poisoning spoils it.

No, you can't give blood... for one year afterwards. Tattooing can possibly introduce an infection underneath the skin, so the Red Cross will not allow donations. They will also not allow donations, for a time, for people who have had or been in contact with serious contagious diseases, like pneumonia. Also, for certain periods of time, if you lived outside of the US, you are permanently banned from ever giving blood.

That being said, most legitimate tattoo artists are cleaner than some doctor's offices I've been to. So stop worrying and if you want to get one, get one!

Has this thread veered off topic too far now?

You can give blood. The red cross called me. I explained to them I recently got a tattoo. They said, and I quote "As long as your tattoo was from a licensed artist you can give blood without complication." And that was just a few weeks ago.

Thanks for the clarification.

But that's just here in Ohio. Not sure if its the same where you are.

The Red Cross still won't take blood if you lived outside the U.S. during certain years though. There's no blood screening test for human carriers of mad cow.