Bill to Ban Modifications | General Discussion | Forum

A A A

Please consider registering
guest

Log In Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search:

— Forum Scope —



— Match —



— Forum Options —




Wildcard usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Topic RSS
Bill to Ban Modifications
Topic Rating: 0 (0 votes) 
August 21, 2013
12:05 am
KendrahLi
Los Angeles, CA -818
Senior Forum Member
Forum Posts: 86
Member Since:
September 9, 2012
Offline
1
0

I'm sure we have members in Arkansas. If it hasn't been seen yet, I was made aware of this piece of legislation by a friend of mine. This may end up affecting our AK members and if other states get the idea to follow the attempt.

http://politicalblindspot.com/…..es-senate/

-= www.khaotyk-artwerx.com =- Ex Ignorantia Ad Sapientiam; E Luce Ad Tenebras
August 22, 2013
3:12 am
acabamento
404
Forum Member
Forum Posts: 6
Member Since:
January 7, 2011
Offline

It would be interesting to know more about that motley crew of experts who felt compelled to take it upon themselves to end the senseless bloodshed. It would also serve Missy Irvin well to utilize grammar when passing judgement (and bills).

August 22, 2013
10:24 am
Oakbear
UK
Minister
Forum Posts: 886
Member Since:
January 7, 2011
Offline
3
0

From the APP site

What is the position of the APP regarding Arkansas Senate Bill 387?

The article going around in regards to Arkansas regulations is a past article. The APP and ABMA (Arkansas Body Modification Association) worked on this Bill with the Senator that sponsored it last year. The outcome achieved was what was best for the state at this time and not what is being reposted. The date on that article is before the last Legislative hearing. Please stop reposting this article and do not write to the Senator.

Steve Joyner
Legislative Committee
Association of Professional Piercers (APP)

http://safepiercing.tumblr.com…..g-arkansas

Some more info here – http://www.bodymod.org/forumposts/22396/

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Nietzsche
August 22, 2013
10:39 am
Oakbear
UK
Minister
Forum Posts: 886
Member Since:
January 7, 2011
Offline
4
0

acabamento – i'm sorry i don't quite understand your point. Are you unhappy that politicians tried to regulate this, or with the modification artists who stepped in to alter it?

So do people think regulation is a good or bad thing? Can it help protect people or is it an unwanted intrusion?

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Nietzsche
August 23, 2013
12:33 pm
acabamento
404
Forum Member
Forum Posts: 6
Member Since:
January 7, 2011
Offline
5
0

Oakbear said

acabamento – i'm sorry i don't quite understand your point. Are you unhappy that politicians tried to regulate this, or with the modification artists who stepped in to alter it?

So do people think regulation is a good or bad thing? Can it help protect people or is it an unwanted intrusion?

Unhappy? Mood unaffected, I'm genuinely curious about the credentials of the artists as it relates to their specific, individual reasons to contest existing policy. Is the market for work so hazardous and poorly performed truly a nuisance in Arkansas, so much so that intervention became a necessity? To speak personally, what detailed information there is and is not on this subject comes across much more politically motivated than personally, as I'd imagine it'd be for artists taking on a task. Clearer than anything else, I'm reading this all as the government now having dominion over practices they did not before, going so far as to substitute an argument for personal and religious freedoms for that of what does and does not constitute plastic surgery.

August 27, 2013
4:59 am
Oakbear
UK
Minister
Forum Posts: 886
Member Since:
January 7, 2011
Offline
6
0

I'd agree that this appeared to be politically motivated initially and not based on any robust evidence.

What then happened is artists (with no particular credentials) began to campaign against this. By working with the politicians the bill became amended to one which focused more on improving standards. I don't think the artists make any claim other than they were the ones who stood up for what they believe in. I know there are some very reputable artists among them though.

For myself i'm torn.I believe in freedom of action, but in the UK at least there are so many poor piercers claiming to be safe and competent. Should a client know the difference? Yes they should research beforehand. Does that mean we should not add additional protection to stop potentially vulnerable people making bad decisions? Maybe, but how much harm is there though? Where to draw the line?
I'm not sure, but think there should be a line, somewhere.

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Nietzsche
August 27, 2013
7:04 pm
vampyremage
Member
Forum Posts: 462
Member Since:
April 8, 2011
Offline
7
0

Personally, I am not at all for banning certain procedures that are deemed to be too risky or too extreme. This will not have the effect of protecting potential clients or artists but, rather, will force such things to go underground. However, I am absolutely for further regulations regarding necessary safety precautions and necessary levels of training in order to help ensure such protections. Unfortunately, in many places body modification and especially advanced body modification has very little in the way of basic regulation. I would think the best bet would be for competent body modification artists to work with policy makers in order to help create laws that will help to make the industry better and not simply restrict access based upon fear and propaganda.

September 4, 2013
4:28 pm
mkabala
Charlotte, NC
Forum Member
Forum Posts: 9
Member Since:
June 4, 2013
Offline
8
0

It seems counterproductive to regulate these procedures without consulting those who practice them. If you ban something outright, then more people will choose to go the route that I have, which is self-modification. I have implanted a magnet and an RFID tag so far and have performed the procedures myself after exhaustive research on the techniques used. All of my self-surgeries to date have turned out quite well, since I observed sanitary precautions during the procedure and meticulous aftercare to prevent any infection from taking hold. Others may not be so thorough though and may seriously injure themselves if they attempt to do these procedures by themselves with inadequate instruction. If a competent professional had been available to me, I would have had the procedures done by them. I felt like a criminal going around local tattoo shops looking for someone who does subdermals. Most people refused to talk to me about it at all. It should not be this way and banning certain procedures instead of regulating them only makes the situation worse.

Forum Timezone: America/New_York

Most Users Ever Online: 116

Currently Online:
3 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

vampyremage: 462

Sommersett: 296

SasQuatch9585: 271

Jamesryan: 227

KristenAtkinson0: 225

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 60

Members: 2202

Moderators: 2

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 2

Forums: 6

Topics: 574

Posts: 5622

Newest Members: Bucket, lueluebell, tat2dbeauty, kobra, Grcaeser, KarenHeinz

Moderators: Oakbear (886), Richard Ivey (6)

Administrators: Chris Carter (194)