> Your local tax dollars at work....
All things considered, zapping gang tattoos off someone so they can get a better job, become productive taxpayers instead of continuing to be social parasites...
I bet you a dollar they get more tattoos within a year.
There are some stupid youths out there who get them and they are not even in gangs but down the line learn it wasnt so cool after all.
There are worse things we waste tax payer monies on and if that can help someone blend in and get a JOB I'm OK with it too.
>Your local tax dollars at work....
All things considered, zapping gang tattoos off someone so they can get a better job, become productive taxpayers instead of continuing to be social parasites...<
Both statements are correct. The answer might be for the person to have to agree to pay back the money it costs for the procedure once they have a productive job. Make them sign some sort of contract or something.
Also, wouldn't you rather a dermatologist get some practice on prisoners?
Actually the lesson they learn from this is: Vote for Democrats and you never have to grow up or pay the price for your own decisions.
So, that's the proper use of tax money or not?
You can use that logic to justify any government program. For instance - send criminals to Stanford instead of prison. It costs the same and will make them more productive members of society.
What if someone has bad teeth or body odor? Should the taxpayers pick up the cost if it means a better job or promotion?
IIRC, a Kali female kongresskritter managed to pork up a federal program for [gang] tattoo removal a
year or two ago.
Yes, it's great if it allows people to get real jobs. But I do have a problem with the shafting everybody else.
I'd be more congenial to the program if tattooees were required to pay a "use and removal" tax before
getting tattooed to fund the program.
Self/friend/prison tattoos? SOL.
I agree with you, a productive citizen is cheaper than keeping someone behind bars.