When one tries to express any Mantra Thinking, the first thing one faces is the Simple Reality Problem.

For example, when it comes to gun control or other libertarian issues, the argument immediately jumps into "Well. There could be some nut that..."

The person saying this also demands that we have An Open Society. In this, libertarians, liberals, and all doctrinaires are united. All forms of Wordism agree that, if you just apply the Doctrine in a society, it will make it safe, bountiful, and all things good, no matter who "happens" to be IN that society.

But you can't demand an open society and at the same time insist that there must be stringent laws because some nut might do something.

Permit holders have once and for all destroyed the illusion that guns are not safe in the hands of responsible citizens who have no costumes. The Memory Hole has totally swallowed up the flat declarations made by ALL gun control advocates that giving out gun permits would "lead to a bloodbath."

You haven't heard that crap mentioned ANYWHERE in sixteen years.

One documentary had a rather desperate stretch which gave me a laugh though I am sure it completely went by the audience. It had one of the most desperate I ha non sequiturs I've ever seen. One scene stated that this guy had "filled out all the paperwork for a gun permit."

The next cut was of him robbing the bank.

Any connection between the two was never mentioned. A law against carrying a gun is no problem for a bank robber. But the documentary makers were DESPERATE to show that one permit holder had actually committed a crime. Either getting that permit was part of brilliant means of avoiding the penalty for armed robbery or that non sequitur was brought in for a reason.

Respectable conservatives don't like permits either. They never mention the "bloodbath" predictions.

That is because the simple reality demonstrated by permits is that, contrary to all Wordist doctrine, the stability of a society is not ensured by a Holy Constitution, or a Holy Church or a Universal set of Family Values.

The stability of a society depends entirely upon WHO makes that society up.

But once again the Simple Reality Problem pops up. It pops up because of tailgating.

I will point out that this whole talk about "some nut" is a total contradiction of the libertarian, liberal, and conservative shouts that THEIR set of words is all that matters, and an Open Society is fine as long as you have the right words.

But the Simple Truth Problem is that two minutes later no one will REMEMBER this point. They will be off on a Discussion comparing Ayn Rand and Igskov Diadec or somebody, involving lots and lots of Deep Wisdom and quotes popular in libservative comments.

But the point is that it doesn't MATEER whether Diadec or Kwantovich had the most impressive quote.

The Simple Truth is the point. But the simple basic point is instantly forgotten.

A society that has a Simple Reality Problem has a reality problem, which is a polite way of saying it's NUTS.