Fox News89%

Florida tattoo shop refuses service to military and veterans for being 'war criminals' 45%

By Rachel del Guidice0%

6/25/2026, 3:00:43 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Unattributed Quote, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.1% saturation with 161 hits. Analysis detected 1,440 faulty-reasoning hits from 595 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.7% and a BS Rank of 45% (12,055 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 55.10% of the article peer group.

A Florida tattoo shop is facing backlash following a social media post from the shop that said active-duty military members and veterans are not welcome at the company, prompting online criticism. 
A June 23 post from Revival Tattoo Collective in Largo, Florida, read, "People all in their feelings because I expressed my opinion of the military and law enforcement. 
My opinion is that the military is a bunch of war criminals and law enforcement kills babies and unarmed citizens in the street. 
If you don’t like my opinion cool, but you’re not going to change it. 
Call me short, post records from 20 years ago, threaten the health dept, use homophobic slurs. 
That only proves my point and shows the true character of our military. 
Thanks for showing your true colors." 
The post added, "Once again for the slow ones the military. 
Pretty simple if you are ex military or currently serving just don’t come to the shop. 
You will be turned away." 
SOCIAL MEDIA ERUPTS OVER MAMDANI'S SILENCE AFTER BROOKLYN COFFEE SHOP BANS JEWISH CONGRESSMAN 
The shop was founded by Brady Martinson, who is described on the website as "a tattooist and sign painter  script, blackletter, and custom typography on skin. 
He treats every word as architecture: measured, weighted, and built to live a lifetime." 
A few of the replies to the controversial post appeared to agree with the sentiment, with one woman saying, "The military preys on underprivileged youth by luring them in with promises to pay for college and makes it sound like it’s their only opportunity to get ahead in life. 
ACAB." 
ACAB is an abbreviation for "all cops are b----ds."  
But many of the replies were negative. 
DEM SENATE HOPEFUL UNDER FIRE FOR RESURFACED COMMENTS CALLING COPS 'OPPORTUNISTIC COWARDS' 
One person wrote, "This kind of thinking is disappointing and immature. 
Judging an entire group by the actions of a few is the same type of prejudice I’m sure you claim to oppose. 
(IE: Against a race, the lgbtq community, etc…) There are good and bad people in every profession and every walk of life." 
They added, "I’ve served alongside people of every background imaginable and some of the most selfless, compassionate individuals I’ve met wear a uniform. 
Reducing millions of military members and law enforcement officers to the worst examples among them isn’t being "woke" or smart  it’s just bias. 
If you are going to reject stereotypes, you should reject them consistently. 
Heal yourself and break this never-ending cycle of conflict among humans." 
Another person replied, "Lmao it must be so peaceful being this ignorant." 
DOJ INVESTIGATING NYC COFFEE SHOP OVER HOSTILE SOCIAL POST ABOUT PRO-ISRAEL POLITICIAN 
"I don't agree with your opinion, but that doesn't mean I won't fight for your right to say it. 
Please keep in mind that the First Amendment merely proyects [sic] you from being punished by the government for your speech. 
It does not protect you from the consequences of what you say," another commentator wrote.  
One gun replied to the post with a gif that said, "Stop breaking the law a--hole." 
Another posted a reply saying, "I'll go and just wont tell you till after lmao," and Revival Tattoo Collective responded to the post with, "No you won’t." 
In a statement to Fox News Digital, a spokesperson for the shop said, "Yeah I’m booked up I can’t take any clients military or civilian. 
Thanks for your interest on my opinion." 
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.5%Rachel del Guidice: 5.3%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 2.4%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%Rachel del Guidice: 4.3%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic12.1%This article: 4.0%Rachel del Guidice: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic4.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 2.9%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Rachel del Guidice: 3.3%Fox Nation: 3.0%Overconfidence Bias3.5%This article: 6.4%Rachel del Guidice: 13.6%Fox Nation: 11.9%Framing Effect6.4%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 2.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias2.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.8%Rachel del Guidice: 7.4%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias1.8%This article: 4.7%Rachel del Guidice: 2.8%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias4.7%This article: 27.1%Rachel del Guidice: 12.4%Fox Nation: 10.8%Negativity Bias27.1%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 2.6%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%Rachel del Guidice: 3.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error2.2%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.7%Rachel del Guidice: 5.0%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias3.7%This article: 6.4%Rachel del Guidice: 3.9%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias6.4%This article: 2.4%Rachel del Guidice: 1.6%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect2.4%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Rachel del Guidice: 1.6%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 1.8%Rachel del Guidice: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias1.8%This article: 12.3%Rachel del Guidice: 2.2%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem12.3%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 1.4%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.4%Rachel del Guidice: 7.0%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority4.4%This article: 12.9%Rachel del Guidice: 2.8%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma12.9%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 1.4%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 22.7%Rachel del Guidice: 11.8%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization22.7%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 1.4%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.6%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.1%Rachel del Guidice: 11.7%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion6.1%This article: 2.4%Rachel del Guidice: 1.7%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question2.4%This article: 2.2%Rachel del Guidice: 3.9%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.2%This article: 8.4%Rachel del Guidice: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque8.4%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.8%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 7.7%Rachel del Guidice: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division7.7%This article: 13.3%Rachel del Guidice: 6.2%Fox Nation: 2.4%Anecdotal13.3%This article: 4.5%Rachel del Guidice: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman4.5%This article: 3.5%Rachel del Guidice: 1.8%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.5%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.2%Rachel del Guidice: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground3.2%This article: 1.8%Rachel del Guidice: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity1.8%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 1.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 20.2%Rachel del Guidice: 2.4%Fox Nation: 1.8%Unattributed Quote20.2%This article: 2.7%Rachel del Guidice: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection2.7%This article: 16.0%Rachel del Guidice: 5.3%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice16.0%This article: 9.2%Rachel del Guidice: 0.7%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination9.2%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 0.8%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel del Guidice: 7.6%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Rachel del Guidice: 1.4%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.3%

595 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers34%attributed speech395writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 28 words • 100.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 23 words • 0.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 14 words • 100.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 16 words • 100.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 6 words • 0.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 11 words • 100.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 16 words • 100.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageBrady Martinson • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBrady Martinson • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRevival Tattoo Collective • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
159 attributed words80% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Unattributed Quote+32.2 ptsWriter: 12.4%Revival Tattoo Collective: 44.7%44.7%Biased Writer Voice-11.7 ptsWriter: 20.5%Revival Tattoo Collective: 8.8%8.8%Indoctrination+14.3 ptsWriter: 5.8%Revival Tattoo Collective: 20.1%20.1%Quote-first Misdirection+10.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Revival Tattoo Collective: 10.1%10.1%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.0 ptsWriter: 2.0%Revival Tattoo Collective: 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.