What part of my comment said otherwise?
According to (and I'm not checking how good these sources are so whatever) thegunzone.com 17% of the us mitary is black men.
Thats 2.6million apparently, which means 500,000 in terms of active, reserved, and civilian members of defense. 1.26 million is the active number, or about 225k troops.
83% of that is about 188k active troops with the condition.
Yep, thats how its supposed to work.
Which is why there may be a perfectly reasonable issue as to why it didnt go any further.
Any surgery carries risk, and requires appropriate consideration.
Let's take breast augmentation as an example. There are some folks who will choose to do so because it will help them match their gender, and that makes a lot of sense for their mental well being. There are some folks who have had a mastectomy, and an augmentation (and in many cases a tattooed nipple to finish things off) will help for their mental well being. These are generally one-time surgeries with a clear beneficial outcome.
There are others who will continually go larger and larger and larger, and its actually detrimental to their health and well being, they are often doing so because of other issues of their self image or self worth, and the surgery will never be enough for them. Its even been shown to make those perceptions of their bodies worse, which is why they end up getting surgery over and over again.
My concern here is whether or not he fits in the first group or the second. I sincerely hope he does not have an internal struggle that will drive him to many surgeries, never addressing the actual issue, and making things worse for himself over time.
How it looks is irrelevant to me, if he likes it more power to him. I think his tattoos are incredible, personally.
I just hope he's OK.
Why do I think surgery to remove body parts for additional tattoos is potentially concerning?
Did you sand in between? Just curious
Ive done smaller things and with ultra fine grit for sanding between coats, ended up with a gorgeous finish (mailbox, exterior lamps, etc)
That would be negligence charges, yes, which is what went to the grand jury. The grand jury, for the record here, is a bunch of randomly selected people - not the cops, or a prosecutor, or anything like that. Its a jury. And what this jury decides is not guilt, but whether or not there is enough evidence that supports the charges to bring it to a trial.
And that grand jury decided there was not.
I'm not aware of (and was unable to find) any specifics around what actually happened, so there may be a very good reason why this was the case.
I'm not defending the decision here, just explaining the situation. It was investigated, the police brought someone and evidence to a prosecutor, a prosecutor brought it to court, and a jury decided the charges didn't fit the evidence to bring forward to a criminal trial. That is all we really know.
Removing his nipples and belly button for more tattoos are the only things that strike me as concerning.
Not for the children, but his own welfare. The tattoos are amazing.
If they aren't on the ballot nationally, its too late.
The silicone bottoms stack great. I bought the ones I have now around 5 years ago, the old trays didnt make it through a move and cracked.
Oh I wasn't complaining, I think its worth sharing!
I just enjoy your memes all over the place.
Yes, a prosecutor presents evidence to convince a jury to go to trial. They have to influence the jury to agree.
Defense's part comes at the trial.
Because they usually bring sufficient evidence, and the jury is only deciding if there is sufficient evidence to move forward. This doesnt decide guilt.
There are plenty of things to complain about when it comes to the US "justice" system. Grand jury decisions aren't remotely the problematic part.