Why not limit the legal age for tattoos to 30?

Mark Latimour · #1 07-14-2009, 06:56 AM

I was at a Mars Volta concert last night and, not being aware that they had such a young crowd, was struck by the amount of young people (ie apparently around age 20) who had tattoos of all sorts of random stuff. Some looked awesome, others not so.

Anyway, I came accross an article that said 25% of people between age 18-25 have tattoos and it got me thinking. Is age 18 too young to allow people to get a tattoo for the rest of their life?

What would be the harm in limiting the legal age to get a tattoo to something like 30? I mean, if a tattoo is for the rest of your life, what difference does another 10-12 years of waiting make in terms of getting one?

Now, you may say that at 18 you are an adult in the eyes of the law. Well, that's partially true, but age 18 is rather arbitrary anyawy and there is no reason why it needs to eb age 18 for everything. FOr example, in the US, drinking age is 21. The age is lower in some European countries.

So what do you think? Should tattoos be limited to those over age 30? Why / Why not?

Absentia · #2 07-14-2009, 07:06 AM

Did the article go over the percentage of that 25% that got their tattoos before the age of 18?

I don't think we should be limited to doing anything chemical or physical to our bodies to any age.

L-A · #3 07-14-2009, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

FOr example, in the US, drinking age is 21. The age is lower in some European countries.

It's 18 in Quebec

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

So what do you think? Should tattoos be limited to those over age 30? Why / Why not?

I don't think so. You have a thousand ways of otherwise scarring or damaging your skin when you're younger than 30. I sport some pretty big cycling scars, along with burns or cuts that are still visible today. A tattoo, among these other marks, is a pretty artistic way of scarring yourself.

Not to mention that you don't have this young, fast-healing skin for all of your life.

All in all, it's one more choice where adulthood either puts you in charge of making responsible decisions, or makes your responsible for your dumb ideas.

ugly_bassplayer · #4 07-14-2009, 07:12 AM

Freedom of choice.
Enough said.

Mark Latimour · #5 07-14-2009, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Absentia

Did the article go over the percentage of that 25% that got their tattoos before the age of 18?

I don't think we should be limited to doing anything chemical or physical to our bodies to any age.

So a 12 year old should be able to legally get his arm cut of wihtout any medical necessity?

Mark Latimour · #6 07-14-2009, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ugly_bassplayer

Freedom of choice.
Enough said.

Not really enough said since there are already age limits on getting a tattoo. Once you accept that there should be some kind of age limit (eg 18), then you have already implicitly agreed to freedom of choice being limited and therefore its not a valid argument in that context. Once you agree that there should be some limit, its simply a question of where is the limit. Unless of course you are advocating no limits on the age for getting a tattoo.

Absentia · #7 07-14-2009, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

So a 12 year old should be able to legally get his arm cut of wihtout any medical necessity?

Absolutely, though your example is a little extreme.

Mark Latimour · #8 07-14-2009, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Absentia

Absolutely, though your example is a little extreme.

Do you think a 12 year old is competant to make a decision like that?

L-A · #9 07-14-2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Do you think a 12 year old is competant to make a decision like that?

He's under parental supervision. If that kid can get a tattoo all by himself, the tattoo artist who did it is completely off-track.

ugly_bassplayer · #10 07-14-2009, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Not really enough said since there are already age limits on getting a tattoo. Once you accept that there should be some kind of age limit (eg 18), then you have already implicitly agreed to freedom of choice being limited and therefore its not a valid argument in that context. Once you agree that there should be some limit, its simply a question of where is the limit. Unless of course you are advocating no limits on the age for getting a tattoo.

Let me guess, you don't have any tattoos?
I agree that their should be an age limit, what should be the limit is dictated by what age your current society considers you an adult.
What makes someone an adult is debate that is very complex, is it age or state of mind...financial independence???

Mark Latimour · #11 07-14-2009, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L-A

He's under parental supervision. If that kid can get a tattoo all by himself, the tattoo artist who did it is completely off-track.

we were talking about a hypothetical situation regarding a kid electing to have his arm removed.

Absentia · #12 07-14-2009, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Do you think a 12 year old is competant to make a decision like that?

If their parents did their job in teaching them common sense which seems to be lacking in alot of todays kids.
Like I said your example is a little extreme to this conversation. No one in their right mind would make a decision like that.
Even to say there was a law limiting the age where you can legally have your arm cut off to 18, what stopping little Tommy dumbass from going to the garage and putting his elbow up to his dad's table saw? nothing.

I think you may be under the impression that kids don't drink, do drugs, get tattoos, piercings, brandings ectect before the legal age.

Mark Latimour · #13 07-14-2009, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ugly_bassplayer

Let me guess, you don't have any tattoos?

Would it make a difference if I did?

Quote:

I agree that their should be an age limit, what should be the limit is dictated by what age your current society considers you an adult.
What makes someone an adult is debate that is very complex, is it age or state of mind...financial independence???

Except that society considers you to be an "adult" for different matters at different times. For example:

14-16 can be tried as "adults"
16 can be an adult for sexual relations purposes
16 can be an adult for driving
18 can "vote" and enlist
21 can drink and go to strip clubs

So if society accepts varying ages for other matters, why not accept a different age for tattoos?

spade2you · #14 07-14-2009, 07:29 AM

Things I was into when I was 18 that I'm still into now: Ummmm..............and.......................not much.

Mark Latimour · #15 07-14-2009, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Absentia

If their parents did their job in teaching them common sense which seems to be lacking in alot of todays kids.
Like I said your example is a little extreme to this conversation. No one in their right mind would make a decision like that.
Even to say there was a law limiting the age where you can legally have your arm cut off to 18, what stopping little Tommy dumbass from going to the garage and putting his elbow up to his dad's table saw? nothing.

I think you are missing the point. IIRC the law does not prevent a child, right now, from tattooing themselves. Its whether it permits a third party from tattooing a child. Its the same with alcohol. As far as I know there is no law that says a minor cannot buy alcohol (although they can't be in possession), but there is a law that says you can't sell alcohol to a minor. Its a fine distinction, but its important for the discussion we are having.

Quote:

I think you may be under the impression that kids don't drink, do drugs, get tattoos, piercings, brandings ectect before the legal age.

You would be wrong if you thought that.

ugly_bassplayer · #16 07-14-2009, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Would it make a difference if I did?

Except that society considers you to be an "adult" for different matters at different times. For example:

14-16 can be tried as "adults"
16 can be an adult for sexual relations purposes
16 can be an adult for driving
18 can "vote" and enlist
21 can drink and go to strip clubs

So if society accepts varying ages for other matters, why not accept a different age for tattoos?

No, but I get the feeling that either you are not tattooed or you have some that you regret.

Exactly what I said, very complex.

L-A · #17 07-14-2009, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

we were talking about a hypothetical situation regarding a kid electing to have his arm removed.

And I'm desperately trying to bring this back to a decent metaphor.

Absentia · #18 07-14-2009, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

I think you are missing the point. IIRC the law does not prevent a child, right now, from tattooing themselves. Its whether it permits a third party from tattooing a child. Its the same with alcohol. As far as I know there is no law that says a minor cannot buy alcohol (although they can't be in possession), but there is a law that says you can't sell alcohol to a minor. Its a fine distinction, but its important for the discussion we are having.

You would be wrong if you thought that.

um...okay...
For give the a reference where someone can get their arm removed or the law saying which age someone can have a third party remove their arm or.... you know, forget it.

Why do you say we need a law preventing tattoos until 30?
kids do stupid stuff they later regret no law is going to prevent that.
I'm just really confused as to what the purpose of this thread is.

Mark Latimour · #19 07-14-2009, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Absentia

um...okay...
For give the a reference where someone can get their arm removed or the law saying which age someone can have a third party remove their arm or.... you know, forget it.

I was just inquiring into the depth of your conviction that no chemical or physical process should have an age limit. If you beleive that, they you must accept all the possible consequences, not just the ones that are "currently an issue". That is the nature of policy making.

Quote:

Why do you say we need a law preventing tattoos until 30?

Where did I say we do. I simply asked "why not"?

Quote:

kids do stupid stuff they later regret no law is going to prevent that.
I'm just really confused as to what the purpose of this thread is.

Discussion. The purpose of this thread is discussion.

**zenrad** · #20 07-14-2009, 07:44 AM

At age 18 you can join the army and kill or be killed, and you're old enough to decide if you want ink on your body.

It's just a tattoo - why some think that they need to save people from themselves by making everthing illegal and regulating it is beyond me. If someone wants a tattoo bad enough there's always a pin or guitar string and ink from a ballpoint pen. I'd rather see someone get it done right.