Tattoos and Piercing in DC

Thanks to the DCist.com for this story.

If you want to get a haircut in the District of Columbia, you can rest assured that whomever takes the scissors to your locks will be licensed and regulated by the D.C. Board of Barber and Cosmetology. If you're in need of dance therapy, whomever works with you has to abide by the D.C. Regulations for Dance Therapy. The list goes on.

Such is life in many cities and states -- any number of professions and practices, from tour guides to podiatrists, either have to be licensed or abide by strict regulations. In the District, license requirements and regulations come either through the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs or the D.C. Department of Health, both with their related boards and commissions.

Except when it comes to someone who wants to permanently ink your skin or poke holes through it.

The District remains one of the few places in the U.S. where tattooing and piercing is unlicensed and largely unregulated, a libertarian reality that may surprise many. While the overwhelming majority of U.S. states regulate tattooing and piercing (or leave it to counties and cities to do so), the District's open market for body art and accessories has survived even New Mexico's, which abandoned its unregulated past in 2008.

Regionally, Maryland allows its counties to issue regulations for tattooing and piercing, while Virginia has developed a healthy regulatory scheme that includes licenses, board-approved examinations, health education and apprenticeships. All told, if you want to become a tattoo artist in the Old Dominion, there's 31 pages of regulations telling you how do so and the Board of Barbers and Cosmetology to make sure you do it right.

The District, meanwhile, has bucked the trend. Recent attempts to impose license requirements and craft specific regulations have been few and far between, though they hint to a more regulated future for tattoo artists and piercers.

In 2009, an additional subtitle was added to the D.C. Municipal Regulations, the city's long and complex operating manual, titled "Tattoo, Body Art, and Body-Piercing Facility Regulations." Since then, though, it has remained little more than a title, with no actual regulations formulated. (A similar subtitle for tanning facilities also remains devoid of actual regulations.)

One city board seems to want that to change. In a questionnaire submitted to the D.C. Council's Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs, the Board of Barber and Cosmetology, which would be the most likely regulatory body for tattooing and piercing, stated that, in 2010, it started "drafting Tattoo Regulations to regulate that practice in the District of Columbia for Apprenticeship, Instructors, and a Regular Tattoo license." For 2011, it added, it planned to "finalize draft tattoo regulations to regulate the industry in the interest of public safety."

That's not good news for Matt Knopp, who has owned and operated Tattoo Paradise in Adams Morgan since 2003. Knopp, who says he follows strict industry standards like not reusing needles or ink, worries that licensing and regulations wouldn't add much more than a financial burden on parlors throughout the city.

"It's another way for the government to make money off of people. It's a way to put their hands in another till," he told DCist. Given the city's ongoing financial troubles, there's probably some truth to that concern.

Additionally, Knopp said that having tattoo parlors regulated by a board responsible for barber shops and beauty salons doesn't make sense for his business. "What do they know about tattoos? Barber shops and tattoo shops -- there's a night and day difference."

Knopp added that he doesn't think that regulations would suddenly make things better, nor would they stop shady tattoo and piercing parlors from opening their doors. To him, like to any true libertarian, the free market and the reputation of tattoo shops in the District -- he said there's only a "handful" -- is enough to sort things out.

Despite concerns expressed by Knopp and others in the District's tattoo industry, they can likely take solace in what Virginia tattoo artist Rick Cherry of Arington's Rick's Tattoo has to say. While he admits that he was initially opposed to Virginia's license requirements and regulations -- he said he'd been tattooing for 35 years by the time they went into effect -- he now thinks that they help bring consistency and customer confidence to an industry that hasn't always had the best name.

"Knowing that everyone has a standard can do nothing but help," Cherry said. "There could be nothing but positive come out of regulating D.C. tattooing." He did admit that he didn't know that the District's lack of regulations made the city a mecca for poor quality or unhygienic work, though, saying that he had seen some "absolutely gorgeous, clean, sanitary, top quality" tattooing come out of the District.

In the meantime, Knopp and other reputable tattoo parlors in the District stress that they follow strict industry standards. Fatty's, a well-known Dupont Circle tattoo parlor, has preempted concerns about a lack of city licenses by explicitly listing the industry standards it follows. Those include sterilizing all equipment, only using needles and ink once, properly disposing of equipment and treating all blood and bodily fluids like they could be infected. Britishinkdc on H Street NE also lists safety procedures, as does Georgetown's Jinx Proof.

Generally, these standards seem to be observed, and it doesn't sound like the city's unregulated tattoo and piercing industry has caused any substantial grief over the years (complaints on Yelp of some parlors seem limited to less-than-stellar customer service). Such a libertarian ethos does has consequences, though -- according to the Red Cross, anyone that gets a tattoo in the District would likely have to wait 12 months before giving blood. The reason? Fears of unsterilized or reused equipment.

In a broader sense, there's always the question if D.C., like other cities, is simply over-regulated. Blogger Matt Yglesias seemed to make the point last year when he admitted that he was an unlicensed barber. That being said, it seems odd that barbers, who aren't stabbing you with needles, have to be licensed and regulated, while tattoo artists and piercers, who are stabbing you, don't.

While any licensing requirements or regulations are still a ways off, the District's libertarian streak when it comes to tattoo and piercings probably won't last forever. In a statement, the D.C. Department of Health said that "draft legislation for regulating tattoo and piercing establishments is under review. [W]e are working vigilantly to replace outdated code provisions and draft regulations that will comply with new industry standards as quickly as possible."