The Army has updated its tattoo policy, allowing soldiers to have one tattoo on each hand that does not exceed one inch in length. This change is in response to the growing concern that what is allowed today under the regulations may be forbidden tomorrow. Enlisted Soldiers who have tattoos that were compliant with previous tattoo policies (grandfathered tattoos) may request commissioning or appointment. Commanders should continue to evaluate potential applicants on the “whole Soldier” concept in making appropriate decisions.
The Navy has one of the most relaxed tattoo policies of all the military branches, making it an ideal choice for those with loads of tattoos, big tattoos, loud tattoos, and anything in-between. Tattoo ETP is required for all Warrant Officer applicants not in compliance with AR 670-1 and Army Directive 2022-09, regardless of self-identification status in iPERMS.
Unlike the defense or civil services, PSUs do not usually have strict rules regarding tattoos. The focus is more on the professional execution of duties rather than the location of the tattoo. Non-permissible tattoos include tattoos on any other part of the body (less than visible in PT gear).
For those with multiple tattoos, a moral waiver is required. However, tattoos are not prohibited, but there are restrictions on their meaning and location. Soldiers are barred from having more than four visible tattoos, which must be smaller than the individual’s hand, below the request for an exception to policy on the tattoo to be approved in support of their Warrant Officer application.
📹 How I became a U.S Army Warrant Officer
This video follows a U.S. Army Warrant Officer as they explain their journey to becoming a Warrant Officer. The speaker discusses their MOS, the challenges they faced, and the importance of shadowing other Warrant Officers to understand the role. They also share their experience with the Warrant Officer selection process and the training they received.
Will Marines Get Tattoos If They Serve As Security Guards?
In the 2021 policy update, the Marine Corps implemented uniform tattoo regulations for all Marines. The Marine Corps Embassy Security Group (MCESG) continues to screen tattoos for applicants and current Marine Security Guards. Understanding the current regulations is crucial for Marines seeking special duty assignments such as recruiting, Marine security guard duty, drill instructor, Marine security force duty, and Marine combat instructor roles. Marines with visible tattoos beyond the set standards must adhere to these regulations, and tattoo content will continue to be evaluated by the MCESG.
Under the new guidelines, those grandfathered with sleeve tattoos can still apply for certain positions like Marine Combat Instructor (PMOS 0913) or Drill Instructor (PMOS 0911), despite prior restrictions. Notably, sleeve tattoos will not disqualify Marines from serving in the MCESG, as stated by Corps spokesman Capt. In contrast, the tattoo policy had been more restrictive previously, with sleeve tattoos banned after a 2007 decision influenced by concerns raised during the 2006 Sergeants Major Symposium.
The recent change, as articulated in Marine Corps Bulletin 1020, allows Mariners to have tattoos that fit within the current guidelines while maintaining an adjudicated Secret Clearance. Despite this progress, Marines currently assigned or scheduled for duty as recruiters (PMOS 8411) and Marine Security Guards (PMOS 8156) who possess sleeve tattoos are not permitted to serve in these capacities.
Any visible tattoos are to be identified during physical examinations at MEPS, with candidates potentially facing disqualification until visible tattoos are concealed or removed. Recent discussions have highlighted that having visible tattoos outside of personal training gear is generally discouraged for Marine Security Guards, regardless of content.
Marines are allowed authorized tattoos that can be covered by a single design or a band tattoo, acknowledging an increasing acceptance of body art within the ranks. This progressive stance reflects a balance between personal expression and professional regulations within the Marine Corps, allowing for flexibility while maintaining necessary security protocols.
What Tattoos Aren'T Allowed In The Police?
The prevailing trend among police departments is to prohibit visible tattoos while in uniform. This typically excludes tattoos below the arm (if wearing short sleeves), tattoos on the neck, face, and legs (for those in shorts), such as bike officers. Specifically, the Greater Manchester Police (GMP) bans tattoos on the face and scalp and disallows tattoos that may be interpreted as discriminatory or offensive, which conflict with the Code of Ethics and Professional Standards.
Importantly, there are no federal regulations governing tattoo policies, meaning that each police department establishes its own guidelines. With a diverse landscape of 50 states and over 3, 000 counties, policies can widely differ.
Generally, many departments permit visible tattoos on areas like the back of the neck (if positioned behind the earlobe) or discreet tattoos on the ear. However, tattoos on the face, neck, and hands are typically prohibited, with an exception for a thin band tattoo on the ring finger in lieu of a wedding ring. Notably, the New York City Police Department’s policy focuses on the meaning behind the tattoos rather than aesthetic reasons.
As tattoos become increasingly common—2016 data indicated that 29% of Americans have at least one tattoo—there is growing advocacy for police departments to relax these restrictions to attract a broader range of applicants. Many officers report having tattoos, with 31% indicating they have non-visible tattoos when in uniform. Opposition to strict tattoo policies is present among some officers, and while visible tattoos on the neck, hands, and face are generally not permitted, certain departments might accommodate full-sleeve tattoos as long as they don’t feature offensive content. Overall, the acceptance of tattoos is evolving, especially among younger generations, provided they are not deemed offensive or inappropriate.
Who Outranks A Warrant Officer?
Commissioned Officers hold a rank above Warrant Officers yet rely on their technical expertise for mission success, acknowledging them as valuable colleagues. In the Navy hierarchy, an admiral supersedes a captain, who in turn outranks a commander. The lowest officer rank above an E9 is typically Chief Warrant Officer 1 or a USNA MIDN, although in practice, this might often be a senior O3 level officer.
All officers, including both commissioned and warrant officers, outrank enlisted personnel, with a stark delineation: a non-commissioned officer (NCO), like a sergeant, is beneath all commissioned officers but can lead enlisted ranks including privates, corporals, and lower-ranked sergeants.
Warrant Officers bridge the gap between enlisted personnel and commissioned officers, generally rising from the enlisted ranks themselves. In Navy ranks, an ensign corresponds to a second lieutenant in other military branches, signifying a lower commissioning level. Warrant Officers also take the same oath as commissioned officers and can lead units, vessels, aircraft, or vehicles despite their lower rank compared to commissioned personnel.
In the Commonwealth military structure, Warrant Officers rank between the chief petty officer and sub-lieutenant in the Navy and between staff sergeant and second lieutenant in the Army. Each military branch manages the roles and responsibilities of Warrant Officers differently, despite the overarching authority defined by rank.
Key roles like the Sergeant Major of the Army, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps illustrate the NCO hierarchy. The relationship between officers, warrant officers, and enlisted personnel is primarily defined by rank, with all commissioned officers surpassing all warrant officers, who likewise outstrip the enlisted ranks. Understanding these distinctions is essential for recognizing command structures within the military.
Does The FBI Allow Tattoos?
Jewelry and piercing guidelines for FBI employees dictate that only jewelry that does not interfere with equipment usage, pose a safety hazard, or disrupt professionalism may be worn. When it comes to tattoos, body art, and branding, the FBI has specific restrictions: tattoos are prohibited on the head, face, neck, tongue, lips, and scalp. Agents are allowed to have tattoos as long as they remain concealed when wearing a standard business suit. Furthermore, tattoos should be tasteful and not excessive.
Sleeve tattoos are permitted provided they aren’t offensive or disruptive. However, any tattoos that reflect significant religious, political, or violent content and are located on the face, neck, hands, or arms are prohibited.
The FBI maintains strict standards regarding physical appearance, particularly during training, but does not categorically ban all tattoos. It is essential to note that disruptive or visible tattoos must be covered. The FBI’s guidelines emphasize that tattoos must be appropriate for a professional environment; those deemed sexist, racist, or extremist are not acceptable. Importantly, having tattoos does not disqualify individuals from becoming FBI agents, but applicants must demonstrate high personal standards.
While visible tattoos might be frowned upon in some professional settings, the FBI acknowledges the personal nature of tattoos, although it has restrictions on their visibility and content. Potential applicants interested in the FBI’s tattoo policies are encouraged to reach out to their local FBI office or recruiting center for detailed guidance.
In conclusion, while the FBI has stringent policies on tattoos, they recognize the evolving cultural acceptance of body art. Agents can possess tattoos as long as they comply with visibility and content regulations, upholding the agency's professional image and values. Those considering a career with the FBI or transitioning from the military should be aware of these guidelines as they navigate their potential eligibility within the agency.
Which Military Branch Is Most Lenient On Tattoos?
The Navy exhibits one of the most relaxed tattoo policies among the military branches. Sailors are permitted to have tattoos on their necks and hands, provided each tattoo is not more than one inch in diameter. Additionally, tattoos behind the ears are allowed, and there is no restriction on the size or number of tattoos on the arms and legs. In contrast, the Army prohibits tattoos on the neck, face, and head, while each military branch has its unique regulations surrounding tattoos.
Historically, the Army maintained strict tattoo policies, but over time has evolved to allow more visible tattoos, reflecting changing cultural dynamics. As of 2024, this comprehensive guide will clarify each branch's guidelines on tattoos, offering insights for recruits and active-duty personnel. It includes information on general rules, prohibited tattoos, and the process of obtaining tattoo waivers when necessary.
Comparing leniency across branches, the Navy stands out. While the Army is noted for being accommodating, the Navy is universally recognized for its flexible stance on tattoo placement and content. For instance, recent updates allow tattooed individuals to consider joining various branches without fear of stringent restrictions, with ring tattoos permitted on each hand in all military divisions.
For Navy personnel, sleeve tattoos and designs on the hands are acceptable, although specific limits apply, like the one-inch size restriction for neck tattoos. The updated Navy policy, marked by relaxation and openness since revisions in 2016, is the most forgiving, making the Navy arguably the best option for recruits heavily adorned with tattoos.
To summarize, if you have numerous tattoos and aim to serve in the military, the Army and especially the Navy are likely the best routes due to their leniencies. Overall, as military policies continue to evolve, each branch's approach to tattoos remains an important factor for potential recruits to consider in their enlistment decisions.
Can You Have Tattoos While Being A Cop?
In recent years, many professions, including police work, have become more accepting of tattoos, with numerous officers sporting them. The primary guideline pertains to the content of the tattoos; images that contain foul language, nudity, or controversial topics are typically not allowed. While having tattoos is generally not a disqualifier for becoming a police officer, their visibility can influence an officer's effectiveness in their role.
Policies surrounding tattoos vary significantly among law enforcement agencies, as there are no federal regulations governing this matter. Each police department has the autonomy to establish its own rules, leading to a broad spectrum of tattoo policies nationwide.
The key takeaway is that while some departments maintain strict policies prohibiting visible tattoos, many have relaxed their stance significantly or impose minimal restrictions. For aspiring officers, it is crucial to research the specific tattoo policies of the department they wish to join, as these policies can be straightforward but not exhaustive. Whether one can become a police officer with tattoos largely depends on the specific regulations of the department, with some allowing covered tattoos or permitting them if they’re not visible on the face or neck.
Different townships enforce varying expectations regarding tattoos, resulting in a patchwork of policies across cities. For many police departments, visible tattoos may need to be concealed while in uniform. However, there is a trend of increased acceptance, with many departments allowing tattoos as long as they are not deemed offensive or excessive. The challenge for new recruits with existing tattoos may lie in navigating these policies, especially if the tattoos are visible on hands, arms, or legs.
Overall, it is now more feasible than ever to have tattoos and be a police officer, with many officers proudly showcasing their ink, though individuals must remain aware of each department's rules to ensure compliance.
Is It Hard To Become A Warrant Officer?
Becoming a warrant officer (WO) in the UK military presents challenges, as candidates must possess significant technical experience and competencies. Typically, you must achieve at least pay grade E5 and accumulate 4-6 years of relevant experience in a skill related to the WO role. While it is possible to become an aviation warrant officer (such as a helicopter pilot) directly from civilian life, other paths require prior military service.
Warrant officers in the British Armed Forces hold the King's Warrant, marking them as high-ranking non-commissioned officers, although they are not saluted as they do not hold the King’s Commission; they are respectfully addressed as "Sir" or "Ma'am."
The journey to become a WO includes submitting a detailed application, which can be daunting for some; however, many who pursue this path find it rewarding. Warrant Officers concentrate on single specialties, contrasting with their commissioned officer counterparts, who engage in broader command roles.
To initiate becoming a WO as an Army Reserve Soldier, individuals are encouraged to attend the Warrant Officer Candidate School (WOCS), typically starting with phase one at the Regional Training Institute at Fort Pickett, Virginia. While only Aviation Warrant Officer candidates may enter the program without military experience, all others must have prior active duty time and reach specific rank prerequisites.
Essential requirements also include being under 33 years of age, demonstrating fitness and competency, and proving exemplary service history—usually 5-7 years at a minimum rank of E-6, backed by recommendations from superiors. To qualify, candidates should also be U. S. citizens, attain a minimum GT score of 110 on the ASVAB, and fulfill educational prerequisites.
Ultimately, aspiring warrant officers should recognize that the role demands extensive expertise, maturity, and dedication to develop key technical and tactical skills necessary for effective leadership and mentorship within their specialized areas.
Can You Have Tattoos In The CIA?
The CIA's website clarifies that having tattoos does not automatically disqualify applicants for employment, inviting qualified individuals to apply. However, specific grooming standards set by the CIA's Security Protective Service (SPS) prohibit tattoos anywhere on the head, face, and neck above the uniform collar. This stipulation has led to a common misconception that individuals with tattoos cannot work for the CIA. In reality, while tattoos are allowed, applicants should be aware of the restrictions that apply.
In essence, the CIA accepts employees and operatives with tattoos, reflecting the normalization of tattoos in contemporary culture. The agency states that "all applicants must have completely removed any and all body art prior to submitting an application" is misleading; tattoos will not disqualify candidates from Agency employment. However, visibility in professional settings can be a factor, particularly in operational roles.
Given this, there are no hard and fast rules prohibiting tattoos for CIA agents, yet it's crucial for prospective employees to understand that certain visibility restrictions could impact their candidacy, especially if tattoos are on the head, face, or above the collar. Nicole de Haay, a CIA spokesperson, emphasizes that the agency employs individuals with tattoos and maintains that a number of tattoos can be permissible as long as they adhere to size limits (e. g., one inch in all directions for hand tattoos).
Ultimately, the CIA no longer broadly rejects candidates based on tattoos, but applicants should exercise caution and be mindful of where their tattoos are located if they pursue a career in intelligence. In summary, while tattoos are permitted, applicants must navigate specific guidelines to enhance their suitability for CIA employment.
Can You Have Tattoos As A Military Officer?
Yes! All US military personnel can have tattoos, provided they do not appear on the face or neck, and do not violate the Uniform Code. The Navy has one of the most relaxed tattoo policies of the military branches, welcoming a variety of tattoos as long as they meet requirements. Recent updates indicate the US Army also permits tattoos, with restrictions on their visibility and size due to the updated AR 670-1 Tattoo Policy. As of 2024, soldiers may have tattoos on hands, necks, and behind the ears, subject to specific size and content limitations.
Each branch has unique regulations regarding tattoos—while obscene, extremist, or gang-related tattoos are prohibited. Facial tattoos remain restricted in all military branches. Active-duty service members planning to get tattoos need to familiarize themselves with their branch's rules to avoid any violations. For example, tattoos cannot be covered with bandages for compliance, and any offensive or hateful designs are not allowed.
The Marine Corps recently updated its policy to allow full-arm "sleeve" tattoos and provides officers with more allowances for visible tattoos while in uniform. Field Grade officers are now permitted one visible tattoo, limited to what is seen by only close associates. Meanwhile, soldiers may display one ring tattoo on each hand, while other types of visible tattoos remain generally prohibited.
It’s crucial to note that if a tattoo is visible in a passport photo, it may be considered unacceptable for military service. The Army's allowance of tattoos has eased somewhat, with provisions for one tattoo per hand not exceeding one inch. Nonetheless, eyebrow tattoos must still conform to color restrictions. Overall, while certain regulations remain, there is a growing acceptance of tattoos among military personnel, as long as they adhere to established guidelines.
Can FBI Have Tattoos?
The FBI maintains high professional standards for its agents regarding appearance, yet there are no explicit tattoo regulations outlined. Those considering joining the FBI, particularly individuals with tattoos, should consult a hiring manager beforehand to discuss any concerns. While the FBI enforces strict appearance guidelines, it does not outright ban all tattoos. However, tattoos located on the head, face, neck, and hands are prohibited, and those on wrists, arms, and legs must remain covered while on duty. Evidence suggests that while tattoo sleeves are permissible, they must likewise be concealed.
The FBI's official policy states that tattoos should be in good taste and not visible when agents are in uniform. Offensive tattoos, including those that are sexist, racist, or extremist, are not allowed. Unlike the FBI, the CIA has more lenient regulations regarding agents having tattoos; these do not automatically disqualify individuals from employment. The FBI values personal integrity and high standards, indicating that tattoos alone are not a disqualifying factor for applicants.
For investigative purposes, tattoos can hold significant meaning and be vital to crime investigations, but they are often missed if not instantly apparent. Importantly, the FBI does not enforce a blanket prohibition on tattoos; candidates are not disqualified solely for having them.
It is noteworthy that different law enforcement agencies have varying grooming standards, and many are becoming increasingly accepting of tattoos, depending on their portrayal and significance. The FBI prohibits any tattoos, brands, or body markings on certain body parts, emphasizing professionalism in law enforcement. In summary, while the FBI has specific restrictions on visible tattoos, possessing them does not preclude an individual from becoming an agent.
📹 The Worst Rank In The Army. #shorts#army
The rank of Corporal some people say it’s the worst rank to have in the Army I like to compare the Corporal to a UFC belt you have …
I had a similar experience, first time select. I am one of the 12 year candidates you spoke of, and felt out of my league with other MI candidates at WOCS. I appreciate your forwardness about teachability and willingness to learn. Like you I am an advocate for the people willing to put the work in. One of my major considerations for becoming a WO is to be a change agent and give joe and ncos the voice they need to effectively communicate need for change and to better the branch (regardless of what branch they are).
Much respect to you Mr. The only reason I didn’t attend WOCS, was because it would have meant flight school (Helo) and a ticket to Saigon. I enlisted January 1971. I tested very high at basic and was asked to take the WO test which I did. But at the time it was voluntary, I continued my ARMY “career” with the MOS 63B20. I was assigned to 314th ASA Bn, 82nd Airborne. We were an electronic surveillance unit. I fixed generators. Because as you know, officers need their A/C in the jungle. Discharged as a staff sgt. in 1977.
Great article. I’m a retired SFC. I was Signals, 31W. I tried so hard to go Warrant. I was so crushed when they contacted me and told me my MOS was not a feeder to Warrant. That still remains one of my career disappointments, along with not being selected to go to jump school after passing the tests 3 times. The competition is always tough for jump school. I was in Patriot back during Desert Storm when I was in Geissen Germany. I was a signals system operator squad leader. The equipment was mounted at the very bottom of the equipment stack in the firing vans. Those were tough days.
Thanks for the insight, Chief. I’m a FCA in the Navy and am looking into applying for 140k before my contract is up in the Navy. As much as I love the Navy, my next set of orders aren’t very diverse, and I can’t see myself being too happy as a schoolhouse teacher. I love the technical side of my job and really want to continue to learn and improve my skills.
The MOS split reminds me of the 11-series consolidation. I enlisted shortly after the elimination of 11H and 11M, but when I got to Campbell the Light vs. Mech mentality was very much in effect. Later, in Iraq, we got a newly promoted Sergeant from Delta Company, which was still mostly comprised of former 11Hs. To his credit, he acknowledged his lack of dismounted patrol experience, so as a SAW Gunner I guided him through the nuances of being an 11B Team Leader. Thanks for sharing, I retired as an 11B SFC, but many of my former comrades became Warrant or Commissioned Officers (obviously mostly Aviation). One, Will McCotter, didn’t get to reap the rewards of his career, leaving us three months after getting diagnosed with Stage IV stomach cancer in 2010, at the age of 26.
I joined the army in 2016 under the street to seat program, still currently serving as a 152 H, been to Afghanistan 2019-2020. Now flying the Echo version of my aircraft and next year is early promotion for CW3. There has been many people asking what I go through doing my job, all the engagements to training to any close calls. A article like this is very helpful and informative to those who have an interest, awesome work
Well put together article. I was a two time submit packet since my proponent wasn’t very helpful at the time. I had a CW5 that was known to just do things his way. I stayed the course and made it to WOCS 19-07 and WOBC 2.5 months later at Ft. Lee (Gregg-Adams) as an 890A. Headed there next month for WOAC. Best thing I ever did for my career
Ita refreshing to hear you don’t have to be an expert but just be willing to learn. That puts me at ease because I’m applying and to be honest… I’m not an expert. I’ve been bounced around so much I don’t know my job as well as others. But I’m willing to put in the work to learn. I hope I get accepted
Crazy that I’m building my packet for 140A right now. I’ve been working with our new 140A while forward as an E6 14P. I understand some of the G stuff since I work with them and like to cross train. I’ve seen a lot of your content and always wondered what your MOS was. Can’t wait to get to it! Love your stuff!
Almost applied to WOCS…I was at my 15 yrs service mark and had been a SFC/E-7 for 3 years and on my second tour on embassy duty (Defense Attaché System)…. Three reasons I didn’t apply: I was in the zone for MSG/E-8, Warrant officer accessions wasn’t keen on approving TOS waivers (2003/2004 timeframe), and a Direct Commission opportunity presented itself (for the US Coast Guard). In the end I applied for the Coast Guard Direct Commission program—selected to come in as an O-2 (skipping being a butter bar—and didn’t have to attend a full blow OCS; only a 4 week Direct Commission Course). The day I was commissioned (the day after my Army discharge), I found out I made the E-8 promotion list….
When Chief was explaining how he became proficient at your job by essentially getting the hit pocket of someone more senior. Be it technical wise or years of experience and just asking them 100 questions. In my personal professional opinion, most people good at their job don’t mind someone asking them a s*** ton of questions because from their perspective it shows that you actually care about what you do and that you want to learn, people are always willing to help out and go out of the way to help out someone who’s willing to learn. Then someone who’s just trying to skirt by doing the bare minimum just to get a paycheck. Because you can ask any leader or anyone in a more senior role there. Their main goal and training someone or finding someone to train is so that that person can come take their job when they move on to another position.
My dad was CWO3 Edward Harmon….82nd Airborne, 2nd Batallion, 504th Infantry, 1st Brigade, HHC and 82nd Headquarters HHC….he was in Just Cause (Panama) and Desert Storm, and 3rd Special Forces Group. He was a WO in Comm.. that’s all I know….he died in 1994 of Gulf War Syndrome…and to this day, that’s all I have ever been told.
I want to be a warrant officer, im an SPC in heavy artillery currently The idea i have is have is become a chief of gun section Ill be 38/39 by that time and once i hit that milestone im going to warrant I have a 109 for a gt score so fas class is needed. Change mos and hit warrant and enjoy another contract
During my time in the Corps, I went NG and Army later, there were a handful of Warrants in 2nd Tanks. Two I really looked up to. One in the Co and the other in my platoon. Professional, knowledgeable and approachable. The one in my plt took, I think it is still call ed this, a brevet promotion to 1st Lt and was placed in another unit. The one we got to replace him was a boiling hot seabag full of taco bell farts. I think he lived in a van down by the New River.
Korea is the bomb. Did my first tour there and yea. My perspective was a lot different from my non-Korea experienced peers. Quite possibly the reason I did so well the rest of my career. Went from e-3 apprentice to e-4 mission qc and analysis in the top office in less than a year. Those people knew my name from then on. Small career, they didn’t know my capability, but they knew my credentials from back then. That’s all it took to open some opportunities.
I was an old school Warrant Officer. I had eleven years of enlisted service and tours in Viet Nam and Korea behind me. I was originally a draftee with MOS 96B/96C. Order of Battle Analyst and POW Interrogator. At the time I was appointed, we prepared a packet, and then went before a local promotion board. There were three RLOs (Real Live Officers, Commissioned) who asked MOS related questions. There was supposed to be a Warrant Officer on the board, but my MOS was not common to many of my assignments, and OB Techs, MOS 964A were in short supply. When I was selected I was in My NCO Advanced Course at the Intel School. I returned to my current assignment at Ft Monroe, VA, and learned that I had to have my SCI access reinstated before I could be appointed. That took about six months. I was appinted on 28 May 1980. My first assignment was with the 193d Infantry Brigade in Panama. Central America was in turmoil at the time. I had several different jobs while I was there. I found rather quickly that the RLOs weren”t fond of Warrants, but the Field Grade Officers were much easier to deal with. When I returned to CONUS the new Warrant Officer Candidate program was coming on line. The branch wanted to get as many people appointed before the program went into effect. So I spent week sitting on selection boards for prospective Warrants of all MOSs. My final assignment before retiring was at the Intel School where I started out as a member of the Warrant Officer Training Team. I had several other positions during the five years that I was there.
Not gonna lie, kinda jealous on you getting to apply for warrant as an E-5 lol I can’t apply for CWO unless I’m fortunate enough to ever get selected for CPO (E-7) and a be between 14-20 years of service. Oh well perhaps one day, if I don’t make it, it won’t be from a lack of trying 😂 regardless, love the vids, keep up the good shit Chief!
Hello Chief. I am one of your fans. Please give me some advice about my situation. I’m a 68E Dental guy who wants to join as 170A Cyber Defense WO. It sounds like nothing relevant at all. But I’m enjoying my current work and trying to have more challenges. I know nobody from the signal branch, and all people that I know are medical corps. how can I start by getting in contact with those people? Thank you!