Brooke+Beidler

Brooke Beidler Gayer, Doreen. "You Need to Enable Javascript." //Pinterest//. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Nov. 2012. .

Guided Question: Should states have the right to dictate if people can get tattoos and where they can have them?

Summary: Although many states have made tattoos legal, there still are some states where it is illegal. States dictate whether or not tattoo parlors are legal. They also create restrictions on where a person is able to have a tattoo. For example in South Carolina a person is not legally able to get a tattoo done on their neck or head. If tattoos are a form of expression then why are they being limited? Who has the right to tell someone they can't pay for a piece of art and have it placed on their own skin? Artistic expression should not be suppressed!

​ Arnald, Bryant. "Tyson Tattoo Artist Lawsuit Hangover Cartoon." //â¤ Cartoon//. N.p., 28 May 2011. Web. 08 Nov. 2012. .


 * **Points made for supporting Tattoo privileges** || **Points made against Tattoo privileges** ||
 * * Freedom of speech: tattoos are a form of expression(White).
 * Artists' first amendment rights would be violated because tattoos are a form of art/ expression(white).
 * A person should be able to make their own decisions on whether or not they get tattoos(Ducker).
 * If you can't get tattoos in one state, who's stopping you from going to another one?
 * Art is art no matter what the surface it is is applied on(Ducker).
 * If you ban tattoos as a form of art what is stopping anyone from banning other forms of art like paintings? || * Tattoos create a public health risk(White).
 * Each state has the ability to control where tattoo parlors are allowed.
 * States create "zones" where tattoo parlors are allowed(Ducker).
 * South Carolinian leaders say that tattoos decrease job opportunities(My personal tattoo artist, Mike).
 * Are tattoos a legitimate form of non-verbal communication(White)?
 * Tattoo shops will "attract unsavory elements" to towns(Nelson). ||
 * COURT CASES THAT DEAL WITH MY TOPIC:**
 * State v. White:** In South Carolina, a man named Ronald P. White illegally tattooed a person. He was not licensed as a tattoo artist and admitted this but claimed that this was unconstitutional because it violated his freedom of speech. Throughout the case there was argument of what exactly was a legitimate form of speech. The conclusion of this case was that tattooing in deed is a form of communication/speech. Just like all other forms of art, tattoos should be protected by the First Amendment.
 * Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach:** The main question this case asks is "whether a municipal ban on tattoo parlors violates the First Amendment." In other words, is creating bans on tattoo parlors unconstitutional? Johnny Anderson tried to establish a tattoo parlor in the City of Hermosa Beach but was denied because this wasn't a legal zone to have a parlor. It was concluded that this ban in Hermosa Beach was unconstitutional and violated his First Amendment rights.
 * Ancient Art Tattoo Studio LTD v. City of Virginia Beach:** Joseph M. Dufresne was in a similar situation as Anderson. He wanted to open a Tattoo parlor in the City of Virginia Beach but was denied because on tattoo zoning ordinances/ banning. He, like Anderson believed this ban violated his First Amendment rights. The conclusion of this case was that it was "unlawful for any person in the city to operate a tattoo establishment or engage in the practice or business of tattooing as a tattoo operator or as a tattoo artist" (Ancient Art Tattoo Studio LTD v. City of Virginia Beach).

Something new that I learned while researching is no state completely bans tattoo parlors anymore although there are still restrictions like zoning designated areas where tattoo parlors are prohibited. These zoning areas are decided by each state. In my opinion there should not be a place where tattoo parlors cannot be a legal business. The technical process of tattooing may not be “speech”, but the end product is defiantly a form of expression and the process and end result cannot be separate. In the end why does it matter if states are able to dictate whether or not tattoo parlors can be legal? The reason is America is a place where people are given rights that are protected by the Amendments in the Bill of Rights. When a person’s rights are violated than a positive quality of what makes America, America is weakened. It is imperative that my rights and the rights of all Americans under the First Amendment are protected, if not our “American” life would be different.
 * WHAT I THINK:**

**WORKS CITED:**

"//ANDERSON v. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH//.", No. 08-56914. September 09, 2010. //Findlaw//, 7 May 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.

Ducker, Richard. "Yer Cheat'n Heart, Tattoos, the First Amendment, and Preemption." Coates Canons NC Local Government Law Blog. University of North Carolina, 28 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.

"HOLD FAST TATTOO, LLC v. CITY OF NORTH CHICAGO.", No. 07 C 4479. //March 7, 2008.// Leagle, 2008. Web. 11 Dec. 2012.

Nelson, Gary. "Arizona Supreme Court in Mesa Case: 1st Amendment Protects Tattoos." The Arizona Republic. N.p., 7 Sept. 2012. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.

"//STATE v. WHITE//.”, No. 25421. Supreme Court of South Carolina, 4 Mar. 2002. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.

White, Ronald P. "Untitled(tattoo)by Ronald P. White." Art on Trial: Art as "Speech" The Thomas Jefferson Center, 2005. Web. 28 Nov. 2012.