ThatICUGuy

ICU Nurse, Hunter, Latter-Day Saint, Pro 2A, Pro-life, Not a MAGA

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

This is a 🧵

Another year come and gone and another year of blatant data manipulation and misclassification from the k-12 school shooting database. This year I will go through about 50 of the 103 incidents it counted in 2025 that fell outside its already overly broad and overinclusive criteria.

The first sentence in the introduction of this database says, "Creating a reliable data set hinges on determining the inclusion and exclusion criteria." It fails to follow its own methodology and the rules it set for itself. It is not a reliable school shooting database.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@oloverink @defense_of_fam Why do you feel entitled enough to sacrifice your child regardless of a disability? Both my siblings contribute to society better than you ever will.

Unlike you i actually know and understand what a life -limiting disability actually entails.

Every child is entitled to life.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@FaithLikeAbish2 @BlackBlessedLDS Tacos and pizza?

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@Berklyhunt11 @FenixAmmoHR Its adorable he thinks hiding behind protection does anything. One can still report his account, and there are already receipts on him abusing the reporting system. Protecting his account just makes him appear more guilty.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@2ndATexan @afpolice @AAGDhillon @CivilRights Its crazy. I hope they get sued and lose big time. Regardless how one feels about the Legos and the company. The @afpolice have been completely out of line.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@FaithLikeAbish2 You should eat pizza! Go crazy!

[‘Murican Brother Shackleford @Hotchkiz]

Remember these facts the next time someone says an old person (who lived through these things before they were buried by history) has bigoted views.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@SolDizZo @FenixAmmoHR He is lurking here as he just blocked me and I haven't ever interacted with him. Talk about being a pussy

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@FenixAmmoHR He must have caught wind that we were reporting him for the post because he deleted it. Still reported his account for manipulation.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

Appeal to Ignorance - Human sex determination is well explained by current biology

Straw Man - we have constantly and fully acknowledged rare variations/DSDs exist and should be studied/treated

Red Herring - Science always continues, but that doesn’t mean we discard robust conclusions just because edge cases exist. Especially since said studies continue to reinforce the binary.

Motte and Bailey- Motte: we should keep learning. Bailey: sex isn’t binary or that the binary view is premature and/or narrow minded. You never have provided any evidence that contradicts the binary. You just imply future evidence might.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

Thats a rhetorical question

Past examples where experts were wrong were overturned by direct contradictory data. In contrast, every piece of data on sex confirms the binary.

Further studies on the subject have simply continued to solidify the binary aspect, there is no historical gotcha here.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX While we are still learning, We do understand human sex determination extremely well.

Speaking in absolutes when the evidence supports it is intellectual honesty. Pretending a well established binary is "narrow minded" or "anti-intellectual" is the actual anti-science move.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX You are simply reinforcing you dont understand how statistics work... while the rate is higher than lightning strikes, both are still statistically insignificant.

We do take the time to study and understand intersex. That is how we know they are still Male and Female.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX Just like how 240,000 people are struck by lightning a year. The gross number is a big number, but statistically, it isnt significant.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX Shifting from a percentage to a raw numbers doesnt change the rate of incidence.

I never stated the raw numbers arent significant. I said they are statistically insignificant, directly refuting your claim about a "significant percentage of humans."

You 100% moved the goalpost

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

Let me ruin your June for a second.

Every year when National Gun Violence Awareness Month rolls around, the same people who have not read a single page of John Lott's 13,312-regression peer-reviewed study start posting pictures of children and demanding you feel responsible for deaths you did not cause and had nothing to do with.

So. Let us talk about children. Since they brought it up.

In 2006, the CDC recorded 642 accidental firearm deaths in the entire United States. For children under the age of ten — the number was 31. Thirteen under age five. Eighteen between five and nine.

Tragic? Absolutely. Every single one.

But here is the number that will not appear on a single "Orange Friday" awareness post: 80.

Eighty children under the age of five drown in bathtubs every year. Every. Single. Year.

ALMOST THREE TIMES as many children drown in bathtubs annually as die from ALL firearm accidents combined — including adults. And forty more drown in five-gallon water buckets. The kind you buy at Home Depot for $4.99.

I have given this information at talks and watched jaws drop, because people genuinely believe the number is in the thousands. They have been so thoroughly marinated in "gun violence awareness" content that their perception of actual risk is completely detached from reality. That is not an accident. That is the point of the campaign.

Where is Bathtub Awareness Month? Where is the congressional hearing on five-gallon bucket control? Where is the hashtag? Where are the orange ribbons for the children who drowned while their parents were in the next room?

There are none. Because the campaign was never about children. It was never about safety. If it were about safety, they would be equally outraged about cars — which killed 1,305 children that same year. Or fire. Or drowning. But they are not. The selective fury lands exclusively on firearms. And if you are a scientist, which I happen to be, you do not get to cherry-pick your data based on which conclusion you prefer. Quinn's Law Number Six: facts are the enemy of liberalism.

Now let us talk about what the actual data says about guns and safety, because John Lott ran 13,000-plus statistical regressions across every county in America and the results are not ambiguous.

Fifty-six percent of convicted felons surveyed in a ten-state study said they would NOT attack a target they believed was armed. Fifty-six percent. The deterrence is real, it is documented, and it functions whether or not a shot is ever fired. The firearm you carry protects your neighbor whether your neighbor knows it or not.

When states passed right-to-carry laws, multiple-victim public shootings — what the media insists on calling "mass shootings" to maximize terror — dropped by 67 percent. Deaths in those events dropped by 75 percent. Injuries by 81 percent. States that adopted these laws virtually ELIMINATED mass public shootings within four to five years. The remaining events? They happened almost exclusively in the specific locations where guns remained banned. The gun-free zones. The places we hang the sign that only the law-abiding ever read.

There were between 760,000 and 3.6 million defensive gun uses in the United States last year alone, depending on which of fifteen national polls you consult. A JAMA Network Open study from March 2025 estimated 489,000 DGUs in which a firearm was actually discharged. The Department of Justice's own National Crime Victimization Survey puts the conservative floor at 65,000 defensive uses per year against assaults, robberies, and home invasions.

No dead body. No coverage. No awareness month.

Here is one more number for you: 74. Seventy-four percent of convicted felons in a National Institute of Justice survey said they actively avoided homes they believed were occupied by armed residents. Criminals respond to incentives. That is not ideology — that is basic deterrence theory, and it is confirmed by the people who actually commit the crimes.

I also want you to think carefully about something the Supreme Court already settled. DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989). Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005). Two separate rulings establishing that the government has NO legal obligation to protect you as an individual. None. You are your own first responder. That is not my opinion — that is settled constitutional law from the highest court in this country.

So the political class that just told you the government is not required to protect you... is also the one demanding you surrender the tool you use to protect yourself.

I want fewer people dead. That is why I know the data. That is why I read the book. That is why I am furious every June when emotion and fundraising replace science and evidence in a "debate" that has actual life-or-death consequences for real people.

You want to honor the children? Honor ALL of them. The ones who drowned. The ones who died in car crashes. And the ones who will never be born because a woman alone in her house at 2 a.m. had no way to stop what was coming through her door.

But what do I know — I am only a published textbook author, a science teacher, a father of four, and a combat medic who spent his career reducing human suffering and who actually read the peer-reviewed data before forming an opinion.

IF you agree:
LIKE this post so the algorithm shows it to people who need to read it.
SHARE this.
COMMENT below — did you know the bathtub number? Or did the narrative keep that from you? Tell me.

And if you want MORE of this -- the data, the history, the science, the stories -- JOIN Bski's Classroom community on X or YouTube.

#MAGA #Veterans #Trump
@JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX That wasnt the argument. Now you are moving the goalposts...

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX This proves my point on you not understanding what the article you posted meant 🤦‍♂️. You reply with a red herring and show that you dont have the basic understanding of statistics.

Just because there are 8 billion persons, doesnt change that it is statistically insignificant.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @ChrisMartzWX "Simply 'I'm a girl, you're a boy'"
This is a Strawman. We acknowledge there are defects/variations, but they are still Male or Female.

1 in 2,000–5,500 births is not a significant percentage

"I am not wrong"

Well you most certainly arent right.

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

@barbarasageek @GrumpyRando @ChrisMartzWX I already did

https://t.co/89hSZArjxV

[ThatICUGuy @ThatICUGuy]

This article does not state there are more than two sexes, that intersex people form a third sex, or that sex is a spectrum

It describes exceptions and variations within the two developmental pathway (genetic defects of male and female, which these extremely rare examples are still male or female)

You are just hoping people wont read the full context or conflate “not 100% textbook typical” with “invalidates the binary.