Madman with face tattoos opens fire on crowd of nude bike riders in LA 60%

By Daniel Farr69%

6/27/2026, 10:26:41 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 36% saturation with 64 hits. Analysis detected 346 faulty-reasoning hits from 178 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.2% and a BS Rank of 60% (8,761 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 60.00% of the article peer group.

A tattooed gunman used a BB gun to open fire on a crowd gathered for the World Naked Bike Ride in Los Angeles on Saturday, injuring two before being arrested, police and witnesses said. 
Authorities said the suspect fired into the crowd, striking at least two people. 
The victims were treated by the Los Angeles Fire Department for injuries that were not considered life-threatening. 
The suspect, described as an adult male dressed in all black with face tattoos, was later located near a federal building where he was taken into custody without incident. 
Investigators recovered a BB gun at the scene believed to have been used in the attack. 
The suspect remains in custody as an investigation continues. 
The World Naked Bike Ride, which takes place in cities around the globe, occupies a legal gray zone around public nudity. 
The ride operates under guidelines that prohibit lewd or sexually explicit exposure, and is framed protest against car culture and an exercise in public expression. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.0%Daniel Farr: 3.8%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias14.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.3%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 4.7%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 16.3%Daniel Farr: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic16.3%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.6%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.5%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 19.7%Daniel Farr: 12.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect19.7%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.2%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.9%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.4%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.4%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 19.7%Daniel Farr: 17.4%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias19.7%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.9%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.4%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.9%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 2.2%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.8%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 2.2%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.2%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 3.0%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.5%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.7%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 3.9%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.6%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.5%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.9%Daniel Farr: 8.2%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion7.9%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.6%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 2.2%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 9.0%Daniel Farr: 0.8%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof9.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.9%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 36.0%Daniel Farr: 1.6%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)36.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground14.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.3%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 26.4%Daniel Farr: 2.6%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote26.4%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 1.8%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 17.4%Daniel Farr: 12.2%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice17.4%This article: 14.0%Daniel Farr: 1.6%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination14.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.4%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 3.8%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Daniel Farr: 0.7%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

178 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers21%attributed speech140writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageLos Angeles Fire Department • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWorld Naked Bike Ride • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

World Naked Bike Ride

100%flagged-word coverage
21 attributed words55% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Unattributed Quote-33.6 ptsWriter: 33.6%World Naked Bike Ride: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-17.9 ptsWriter: 17.9%World Naked Bike Ride: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.0 ptsWriter: 10.0%World Naked Bike Ride: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.