My first accessory/My Tattoo! Do you have any

[macwilkin]

I've got some ink.

Its your skin/canvas

Follow your heart, not the rules.

Ron

That's easy to say when it's not your property.

Arms are private property, as Macman mentioned. There is no such creature as a "family crest". In countries with a heraldic authority, such as Scotland, Canada, etc., the use of arms that are not your own is illegal -- the usurping of arms.

And yes, I know...America does not have a heraldic authority, no rules, freedom of expression and all that. But just because you can doesn't mean you should, if nothing else out of respect for the custom.

I would much rather see Americans "assume" their own arms with no recognition from a heraldic authority than usurp them from someone else. Some heraldic scholars believe that in a nation with no legal heraldic authority, assuming arms is acceptable, although they may not be recognized by the Lyon Court, et al.

Why not use the clansman's badge that you have displayed as your avatar, as Macman mentioned? That is the whole purpose of it, after all, for clansmen and clanswomen to show their loyalty to the chief and clan.

But really, unless you're claiming to be the actual Clan Chief, nobody is going to bother you.

Technically, though, by usurping the Chief's arms, you are doing just that.

I'm really not trying to be a jerk here. I have been a student of heraldry for many years now, and I'm only telling you what I know. Our own Matt Newsome has a great introductory article on his web site about Scottish heraldry that is worth perusing:

http://www.albanach.org/scotheraldry.html

I dealt with this question on a fairly regular basis as a genealogical librarian, and I gave folks the same advice I'm giving you now: while technically, as many have said here, there is nothing "illegal" about here in the USA, it's just not correct. I feel that someone should give the opposing viewpoint in this thread for informational purposes.

But, in the end, it's your decision. I'm not going to attack you for it, or have you hauled in front of the Lyon Court. As a librarian, all I can do is provide the opposing viewpoint for your consideration.

Regards,

Todd

[obuchiteck]

That's easy to say when it's not your property.

Arms are private property, as Macman mentioned. There is no such creature as a "family crest". In countries with a heraldic authority, such as Scotland, Canada, etc., the use of arms that are not your own is illegal -- the usurping of arms.

And yes, I know...America does not have a heraldic authority, no rules, freedom of expression and all that. But just because you can doesn't mean you should, if nothing else out of respect for the custom.

I would much rather see Americans "assume" their own arms with no recognition from a heraldic authority than usurp them from someone else. Some heraldic scholars believe that in a nation with no legal heraldic authority, assuming arms is acceptable, although they may not be recognized by the Lyon Court, et al.

Why not use the clansman's badge that you have displayed as your avatar, as Macman mentioned? That is the whole purpose of it, after all, for clansmen and clanswomen to show their loyalty to the chief and clan.



Technically, though, by usurping the Chief's arms, you are doing just that.

I'm really not trying to be a jerk here. I have been a student of heraldry for many years now, and I'm only telling you what I know. Our own Matt Newsome has a great introductory article on his web site about Scottish heraldry that is worth perusing:

http://www.albanach.org/scotheraldry.html

I dealt with this question on a fairly regular basis as a genealogical librarian, and I gave folks the same advice I'm giving you now: while technically, as many have said here, there is nothing "illegal" about here in the USA, it's just not correct. I feel that someone should give the opposing viewpoint in this thread for informational purposes.

But, in the end, it's your decision. I'm not going to attack you for it, or have you hauled in front of the Lyon Court. As a librarian, all I can do is provide the opposing viewpoint for your consideration.

Regards,

Todd

This is my point in general. You see, could you imagine if I would of bumped into this chap at some Celtic fest. I just wouldn’t have the patience to tell him to get over it, and who knows he’s probably an awesome person and know I would of lost out on meeting him because of a history and cultural gaff.

So I’ve decided to just get the Scottish flag instead. It’ll keep me out of jail, as I have a short fuse.

[Riverkilt]

Tell you what....I still say follow your heart.

Looks like you researched the "rules." some. Its too bad when a man shows his allegiance in the "wrong" way....

Ron

[CelticRanger66]

To my fellow Clans of the Cat member:

My only advice is to make sure your brother places the Tattoo somewhere it isnt visible because I know the Army takes its Tattoo rules very seriously nowadays!!!

Good job on your sketch!!

[Tattoo Bradley]

To my fellow Clans of the Cat member:

My only advice is to make sure your brother places the Tattoo somewhere it isnt visible because I know the Army takes its Tattoo rules very seriously nowadays!!!

Good job on your sketch!!

Not to deviate too far from the original topic. BUT, you might want to go read the newest version of AR 670-1. The tattoo policy has be VERY relaxed. Heck, the Army even allows tattoos on the neck now (behind the middle of the ear.) They also allow hands to be tattooed. When I was in (2003-2004) I sported two FULL sleeves... forearms entirely covered. I also went through MEPS and swore in that way. I was completely within Army regulations. The reg stated "covered when in Class A uniform." As stated above, it's even more relaxed than that now.

I'm a regular on a Body Modification site, and I've followed this story as it was featured there more than once.

[macwilkin]

This is my point in general. You see, could you imagine if I would of bumped into this chap at some Celtic fest. I just wouldn’t have the patience to tell him to get over it, and who knows he’s probably an awesome person and know I would of lost out on meeting him because of a history and cultural gaff.

So I’ve decided to just get the Scottish flag instead. It’ll keep me out of jail, as I have a short fuse.

Sir,

As I said earlier, I am only giving you the opposing viewpoint, since there are always two sides to the story. What you do with the information is your business. I would never accost anyone at a games or festival (and believe me there are many opportunities to do so), but if I'm asked to give my opinion or provide the facts, I will do so. I'm obligated to do so, as an educator.

Regards,

Todd

[Brother Falldown]

That's easy to say when it's not your property.

Arms are private property, as Macman mentioned. There is no such creature as a "family crest". In countries with a heraldic authority, such as Scotland, Canada, etc., the use of arms that are not your own is illegal -- the usurping of arms.

And yes, I know...America does not have a heraldic authority, no rules, freedom of expression and all that. But just because you can doesn't mean you should, if nothing else out of respect for the custom.

I would much rather see Americans "assume" their own arms with no recognition from a heraldic authority than usurp them from someone else. Some heraldic scholars believe that in a nation with no legal heraldic authority, assuming arms is acceptable, although they may not be recognized by the Lyon Court, et al.

Why not use the clansman's badge that you have displayed as your avatar, as Macman mentioned? That is the whole purpose of it, after all, for clansmen and clanswomen to show their loyalty to the chief and clan.



Technically, though, by usurping the Chief's arms, you are doing just that.

I'm really not trying to be a jerk here. I have been a student of heraldry for many years now, and I'm only telling you what I know. Our own Matt Newsome has a great introductory article on his web site about Scottish heraldry that is worth perusing:

http://www.albanach.org/scotheraldry.html

I dealt with this question on a fairly regular basis as a genealogical librarian, and I gave folks the same advice I'm giving you now: while technically, as many have said here, there is nothing "illegal" about here in the USA, it's just not correct. I feel that someone should give the opposing viewpoint in this thread for informational purposes.

But, in the end, it's your decision. I'm not going to attack you for it, or have you hauled in front of the Lyon Court. As a librarian, all I can do is provide the opposing viewpoint for your consideration.

Regards,

Todd

Todd,

This is exactly what my siblings and I did for our father's 87th birthday. We gave the designer our guidelines, four hounds for the four children- one always covering the others' back, crossed fire pikes to acknowlege his distinguished 33 years as a firefighter, on a field of red to acknowlege his military service (a Marine CWO), and with a Raven on the helm to honor his squadron "The Flying Nightmares". It is registerd with American College of Heraldry and with his permission I use it as my avatar.

Seems to mean a little more to me being Dad's and all.

[Cherub]

Very nice work, you have a talented artist working on you.

I don't have any ink but do have a scarification of a Star of David done on my back. It was done with tattoo gun with a thin blade in it a test for the artist and it worked rather well. If i ever win the lottery I'll get it outlined and added to.