Don: If people want to dump themselves in ink, slice and dice their face cheeks, mutilate male/female genitals in the name of medicine…

I assume that by “dump themselves in ink” you mean get tattooed—people have been getting tattooed for thousands of years.

I do not know that anybody in the Western world is “slicing and dicing their face cheeks” for any reason. 

I fully agree that the practice of mutilating infant male genitals in the name of medicine needs to stop.  I also understand that there are religious ceremonies that involve the ritual mutilation of infant male foreskins and the infant female clitoris.  I doubt that it will be possible to stop the ritualistic genital mutilations because arguing against religious beliefs is unproductive.

Let a child show up in public, or private, with ink markings across their face, or body, because of parental influence, and I will see that parent, or guardian, rot in fucking HELL!

There is no hell—and you wouldn’t have the balls to do shit.

To Sexy from Don:

Sexy said:

Did anyone else get the sense that, about nine posts back, Don was actually implying that body modification is against the law? We all know already that he knows jack shit about law (in spite of his apparent fixation with it), but fuck…

Don:

YES, body mutilations are against torts, the main point being, that I am damaged, and you will be held culpable.

That includes the State, that allows my children to be influenced by sadistic teachers that support body mutilations. And the work place is NOT exempt.

So cover your filthy art, or pay the price.

Bet me.

Being born white/black, we are NOT in control of, nor accidents or injuries, but scaring the human flesh with the intent to disfigure, there is NO excuse for stupidity.

Don

I’ll take that bet, Don. Put up or shut up.

Itdon’tmater said:

I assume that by “dump themselves in ink” you mean get tattooed—people have been getting tattooed for thousands of years.

Don:

I mean where in hell does a person place limits? If even one tattoo is so called “good” why not dump the entire body in pig art and call it even better?

Also, people have been killing others for thousands of years, so that is good also?

I think not.

Don

Hang in there Les, all I need is one court case of tort against tattoos, and/or statutory law, and/or social deviance, to make my point.

I have read several court cases to make my point. However, to cut to the chase, put a big fucking cross on your face and see what your chances are of normalcy in western society. Now by your actions, as valid language, you tell kids to do the same? In addition, you don’t think there is legal action I can take for my protection and family?

Your are funny, if I can’t win in court I will still get your ass fired, as if in real life example. I do not stand alone as to disfiguring the body is wrong. You have the right to cover that filthy man made mark on your body, if you have one.

I quoted case law, constitutional law, as valid reference, on the freedom of speech, and limitations, and everyone here forgot how to read. How convenient. Now you want me to do your homework again? Maybe I will.

Press the issue and I might accommodate you. I rather you do your own homework.

Don

Don: If a person cares not for himself or herself, then think about the kids.

Hmmm, where have we heard that before? Don, are you trying to compete with this character?

So cover your filthy art…

Never.

...or pay the price.

Which is what, big boy?

Don scribbled…

Hang in there Les, all I need is one court case of tort against tattoos, and/or statutory law, and/or social deviance, to make my point.

Yeah, that’s what I figured. All talk and no walk.

Press the issue and I might accommodate you. I rather you do your own homework.

Put up or shut up, Don. I’m pressing the point.

Abandon

To Les from Don:

Here Les,  ORS (2005) 690.005 to 690.992 including Criminal penalties, definitions, exceptions, and regulations on tattooing and other body markings.

Your challenge has been met and I am not finished yet.

Go to “ORS (2005)”, Google search.

The point being tattooing is regulative by state LAW, there are recourses, and there are limitations. That is all I needed to show.

Don

Further more Les,  to show “negligence”,  as being I was drunk and I got this tattoo, (being to young or not of sound mind other wise) the practitioner “Should have known” the patron was NOT of sound mind and therefore is NOT able to give “valid consent” under Tort law, as a defense.

Reference, see “findlaw.com” under remedies and the definition of “negligence” in tort.

Now, under the general provisions of “police regulations” of the Great State of Oregon, IF a person is a danger to themselves or others, even children, they are to be incarcerated and then be arraigned before a court of law for judgement.

Disfiguring the human body, most certainly, can fit this category. The standard is “the common man”, and “common reasoning” as a valid model in all of the USA.

I suppose you want me to go the CPS files. As what endangers a child?  The standard is,  Not only physically but “mentally”, damaging to a child,  both are of equal weight. That being scarring of the human body is WRONG.

Tolerance,  Zero.

So cover up that pig art, don’t ask and don’t tell.

Don

When I post in detail,  you do all you can to trash the person, if I speak in broad terms, you trash them even further.

This is truly a sight where, what ever you say can and will be used against you.

So what else do you have Les, how do you define the person who scars up their body and calls it “art”;  what is to stop the same person from doing tattoos to a child that has neither choice, intellect, nor the power to prevent it? Nothing! but there are consequences, I will see to that.

How about cultic influence, or peer presser, this defines art? Kiss my ass for that stupidity.

Can you show any limits to tattooing or body mutilations? NO, just more BS.

I have one standard, NO to self mutilations,  and pull that fucking ring out of your lip if you have one, if the point is to make yourself a freak in real life, you did it, I’m grossed out, and I do not argue with success.

Don

LOL! Is that all you’re going to do? Quote from an Oregon statute? That’s fucking funny as hell. A few comments back you were betting you could successfully prosecute someone for “damaging you” by having a tattoo and I called you on it and all you’re going to do is sit around and cite irrelevant laws.

That’s pretty fucking sad. I wanted to see you successfully prosecute someone, but like I said before, you’re all talk.

You make me want to get a tattoo just to piss you off.

In addition, to give credence where it is not deserved.

“The Massachusetts Superior Court, in the personage of Justice Barbara Rouse found for the tattoo artist, overturned a 38 year old ban on the practice of tattooing and refuted the states’ claim that their ban was in place to enhance public health and safety.

The judge eloquently pointed out that by maintaining the illegality of tattooing, artists tend to be secretive and difficult to locate, and certainly made them not subject to any kind of inspection process, or licensing or registering of tattoo artists and piercers.

While many tattoo artists who understand safe and clean practices can effectively ply their trade in a private home, it is not preferable.

Clean, brightly lit professional facilities are the norm around the country and world, and for the State of Massachusetts to deny its citizens equal protection and opportunities others have was seen for the farce that it was.

Judge Rouse correctly saw that public safety would be greatly enhanced if the archaic law was overturned, and a proper system of checks on both facilities and artists put in place.”

Don continuing:

Therefore, the artist, on human skin, in this case, recanted his work as being inferior, but you cannot do a damn thing about it! YOU are scarred for life, even if the State says, “Yeah, go fuck yourself up.”

How do you punish a suicide? It cannot be done, so buyer be ware. If you have no respect for your own human body, you have no FUCKING idea what art is, nor art’s subjectivity, then YOU are not a safe person. Though there may not be a law to say YOU CANNOT mutilate your body with ink, there are limits and if there is even ONE limit, then YOU LOOSE Les.

Don

Settle down, Don, or just fuck off ... even my patience has dissipated.
By the way - are you deaf? Can’t you hear me shouting from here?
In all your 25 years of being a salesman did you ever hear the one about flies and vinegar and honey.
You been using vinegar, mate. It DOES NOT work.
Have a nice day.

Don: The point being tattooing is regulative by state LAW

I don’t see your point, tattooists usually have fewer rules or laws than barbers do.  The laws you cited are for Oregon and are one of the more elaborate state laws regarding tattoos.  Not all states have laws concerning tattoos and most state laws just set age requirements and/or set Health & Safety requirements.  A few states require licenses, registration, or permits, and a few require medical doctor supervision (at least for some types of tattoos).
Tattoo Laws

Les wrote:

“LOL! Is that all you’re going to do? Quote from an Oregon statute?”

Don:

You just proved yourself a real idiot, Les. Go ahead and fuck around with State laws, and civil litigations,  give your thumbs down. YOU don’t even read, as YOU know it all. I have seen your kind so many times giving excuses to judges, it makes me either vomit or smile.

I met the challenge to make the point (tattooing is degenerative, as you can not define art, nor to what extent). 

I saw you, and met you,  head on and face first, and this is what you can come back with? You’re degenerating of state statutes? You are the giggle of all giggles.

SO what basis of opinions do you have Les? If you say “god” I will vomit all over you (NOT literally), But YOU Les have to show some basis of your thinking, or I can discount you as an other blow hard, one of zillion of opinions of other wise unknown persons.

Don

There’s some strange sort of irony involved with the degeneration of this thread. It started off describing the ravings of a fundamentalist lunatic, and here we are 141 comments later and we have the ravings of another lunatic.

SO what basis of opinions do you have Les? If you say “god” I will vomit all over you (NOT literally)

Jebus! Apart from everything else, does Don really still not get that Les is an atheist? Really? REALLY?

I have one standard, NO to self mutilations, and pull that fucking ring out of your lip if you have one

If you don’t like “self mutilation”, then don’t do it.  It is none of your business to tell other people not to perform body modifications to their own body. 

By the way, body modifications and tattoos are commonly called “body art”, even though not everybody who has it done considers it to be art.  One example might be affinity tattoos, such as when members of a group or organization get a tattoo of a specific, generally traditional, design.  When somebody puts no real thought into their tattoo and gets a flash “art” tattoo of a rose just to be able to say that they have tattoo,  I don’t consider that to be art.

I don’t consider my prince albert pierce or my septum pierce (which are rather large holes) to be art, I do consider them to be erotic.

itdontmatter said:

don’t see your point, tattooists usually have fewer rules or laws than barbers do.  The laws you cited are for Oregon and are one of the more elaborate state laws regarding tattoos.

Don responded.

The laws in Oregon were modeled according to human decency, (always up for revisions, as at one time there were no cars; that where an individual is not capable to decree for themselves what is fair and just, the State steps in to afford some guide lines. Now this is putting it mildly.

ALL knowledge has to be based on something, in Oregon we use, as all other states, the “common person” going way back to over 600 years ago. Nothing new here,  if you read human history.

I showed by state statute that there are limitations to tattooing, even police powers, and I showed that a person being tattooed, has recourses, if the artist relents (as that is the best they can do? Right, the best in all creation? RIGHT, vomit.)

ALL of what bust the bubble of, “ink on human skin is beautiful.” And where do you draw the line?

It is NOT just my opinion but I am backed up by the rule of statutory LAW, and that of civil litigation being tort.

Now go argue with the State, and if you hurt others, you hurt a child, I will be, and have been, worse than stink on shit. You go apply for a job, any job, with markings all over your body, of what cult sect you belong to; there is NO law that says you must be hired.

However, itdontmatter, go form a union, fight the state, I would like to see that. Moreover, what will you do? Hold me down as you cut and dump ink into my body? Will you deny me my right of gainful employment because I did NOT mutilate my body?

I highly suspect that tattoo parlors all over this nation will be dragged into court kicking and screaming. There is so much liability in scarring up the human body, the State of Oregon, nor I,  will be silant.

Don

Don, we’re all glad you’ve found Findlaw, but Findlaw doesn’t make you an expert on the law and trying to base and support your claims upon the law without understanding the basis of those supports is pretty pathetic. Here’s the skinny: Basically people are allowed to do almost anything they want to their own bodies except for some pretty extreme things that can result in their deaths (in some cases) and those activities which warrant public health hazards.

That’s because protecting the public from “mutilating” their own bodies isn’t really covered in the Constitution. You’ve got a better constitutional basis for preventing people from smearing shit on themselves than just changing the pigment of their skin.

Now, you’re correct in your claims that tattoo parlors are regulated. So is your local Arby’s, and it’s not for preventing you from stuffing your ass with cheddar melts until you grow grotesque amounts of body fat. It’s to prevent disease outbreaks and occasionally to license the artists themselves for tax purposes or to maintain minimum standards regarding the health standards education.

You’re also pretty confused about torts. Everyone has the “right” to sue anyone for anything, except some state prisoners in states where those rights are specifically abrogated by legislation. You’re confusing the right to affirm contract with specific regulations within state law about affirmations made by people who are getting tattoos, usually under the acknowledgment that tattoo artists are engaging in minor medical activities which are also covered by ideas in the law about who can affirm in the positive for a medical procedure. For the most public and recent activity surrounding this idea, just look to Terry Schiavo, which was a case entirely about the right to consent for medical procedures.

It isn’t a matter of automatic tort consideration if someone gets a tattoo or displays a tattoo. It may come under specific regulatory liability issues though, when someone is otherwise without full use of their mental faculties, due to specific state regulation.

It can be a tort for almost any reason imaginable, assuming you’re allowing for cases that the courts would automatically dismiss without consideration, because theoretically you can sue the President because your pickle talks dirty to you at night. It won’t go anywhere, but you’re allowed to file the papers, pay the court costs, get tossed out of court, and perhaps even be subject to laws regarding frivolous suits.

Anyways Don, you don’t understand the law. It’s clear. You’re probably entering a few keywords into Findlaw and pretending that’s what real lawyers do picking up all their precedents and offering legal advice. It’s not. Again, I suggest that you go back to school, because you need a better education. Your reading comprehension could use some dedicated tutoring, and after a few hard years in working on you English skills you might even be able to read those cases you’re parading so proudly and understand what you’re actually reading.

Finally, the idea that minors are not allowed to enter into contract or give consent is a common misperception. Certainly, minors in most cases have guardians who are allowed to act as agents on the minor’s behalf; but minors are allowed to enter contract and give consent along with anyone with the understanding that they can avoid many agreements they enter into on the basis of their lack of competence, not a lack of capacity. Children often assert competence by entering and consenting though, especially older children closer to their majority.

Now, I’m certainly not a lawyer, but I think that I’ve pretty much covered the bases except your ranting. I’m not going to go into specific state law to go line by line, state by state, county reg by county reg; but please do all of us a favor and stop trying to make out like you’re Matlock. Even Matlock’s law sucked, and you’re no Matlock.

Yes, I hear you luckyJohn:

Don:

I am so tired of parlay to other people’s opinion of BS; I just want a finial answer.

Knowing humans as I do, only the rule of authority can do that i.e. give a final judgment on an issue.

I, and my kind, have trashed more gods in court than I have notches in my legal pad to count.  Therefore, I am certainly NOT going to stand still for justifications to fuck up the human body with ink and lip stretching (what ever).

I want the very best for my kind, called humanity, and I want the power to do factual good works. Therefore, I do not mind the challenge, intellectual or other wise.

IF you fault me, fault me on the rule law, and in court by a judge’s ruling, as that is where I stake my high ground, and I will not relent, and I do not stand alone, and I have police powers, and social backing by torts,  when I am right.

Now beat that.

Don

OK MisterMook I read your post.

YOU said:

“You’re also pretty confused about torts. Everyone has the “right” to sue anyone for anything…”

Don:

Show me where in the Tort definition I am wrong! I dare YOU! I’m in the USA, so speak my language.

You are also wrong in litagation, though you had a vain attempt to show exceptions.

There are definite rules of what a case can be brought into court, or not, and there are appeals, of what you hardly mentioned.

You cannot SUE anyone for anything. To make a weak claim in court, at best, could open up your attorney for a negligence suit, and your personal liability,  by the Ore. Bar, that is also valid law as regulations, and the order, with intellect to go by. Also see ORCP, 2005 edition, page one.
 

On minors:

Minors can not enter into a contract, but only for those items, services, are required of “necessity”: and being to the point, tattoos and lip stretching is NOT a necessity.

YES, of fact, IF you are a minor, then such a minor can SUE, the practitioner for MORE than physical damages, but even life long pain and suffering.

So my point is made again, there are limits to tattooing, and body pig art, and IF there is ONE valid “legal” reason, there are many.

AND going by torts, the barn door is open to collective civil logic and litigation.

By the way, nice post, MisterMook, your are cool, I look forward to locking horns with you.

Don

Can someone write a program to translate Don’s ramblings into something like English?

I mean, his posts look sorta like English. If you look at the words individually, they appear to be English. But put all together in that way of his, and they become more obscure than ancient croatian.

I wonder if a babel fish would help?

Oh, and hey Don, you never answered my question. How many books have you read this week?

YES, Les, I agree. Your point is well made.

You said:

“I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m very well aware of how much I’ve changed over the years, particularly between the ages of 20 and 30, and I didn’t need a tape recorder to realize it. I often refer to my early 20’s as “my asshole years.”

Don:

YES Les, we look back in time with 20/20 hind sight, and then vomit in the nearest gutter, and that would better than vomit on ourselves. I never said other wise; I am nothing but a human, and life marches on, relentlessly.

Therefore, your point is, why scab yourself with ink and body mutilations, when you are young and dumb? Why give into cults? Why bend to peer presser? I don’t know why, only that people do, and if I just had some guidance, something solid I can hammer on that will not break, I would be a very RICH person.

Being such (rich), I must pass on what I have learned. YES, there is plenty to hammer on that does not break, and that is the rule of law, torts, and human decency, from times past.

Point being, do NOT puke up the human body by appearance of man made art. Ideas change, moods alter, standards may waver every hundred years or so, But YOU yourself, are just FINE, and lovely, just as you are, and NO man made art is needed.

You want art? Not a problem! Let us start with box tops, and then truck back into history from where we came from. I will show you art of humans long past, art to the sky and even beyond, ever changing,  but leave your body alone, it is perfect just as it is.

Don