The “Moral Cause” of a Racket

The “Moral Cause” of a Racket

Eric Hoffer wrote, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” (The Temper of Our Time)

Butch and Cindi Moore, parents of a daughter killed by her boyfriend, who successfully pushed for Bree’s Law last year, found a new cause, joining opposition to SB174 legislation that would allow concealed carry on UAA Campus.

They have found media support for their newly found position in glowing articles in Alice Rogoff’s fish wrapper and the MatSu Frontiersman.

Friday morning, I had the opportunity to listen to Mr. Moore chat with Tom Anderson on the issue.  Anderson was not real happy with the conversation.  Mr. Moore came well prepared and articulate, though his arguments were disingenuous.  Essentially, Mr. Moore is saying that if you cannot carry firearms everywhere in the state of Alaska, the legislature should not open UAA campuses to concealed carry. In other words, if we cannot make the big global change, we should make no attempt to make the small one.

In doing this, he is making perfection the enemy of good enough.  He is also adroitly changing the subject from UAA to the legislature, much to the glee of anti-gun cheerleaders in the media all while claiming to be supportive of gun rights.  Yeah, right.  Note to self:  When you make the anti-gunners happy, you are never, ever supporting gun rights.

Moral authority is one of those interesting things that skillful and unscrupulous people use to press their agenda.  A terrible thing happened to Mr. Moore’s daughter and family.  He and his wife took the mantle of moral authority from that event to push for legislation in their mind aimed at solving the problem.  Fair enough.  While I don’t think Bree’s law will do anything to stop the next murder, the deed is done at least for now.

But that was a year ago, and now they are back wearing the same mantle of moral authority in their attempt to fight the effort to open UAA campuses for firearms carry.  Tell me again how that relates to the loss of your daughter?

To me, campus carry is a no brainer.  Under current law, our campuses are a free fire zone, a potential target for any yahoo who wants to kill a bunch of people to get their 15 minutes of fame or worship their moon god in the proper manner.  The difference between the unsuccessful Muslim attack in Garland, TX and a similar (successful) attack in San Bernardino last year is that Garland had guns.  The only person who died in Garland was the Islamist shooter.  It is only a matter of time before that road show ends up on our doorstep in a campus or government building here in Alaska.

And if there is a case to be made to carry concealed in other government buildings here in Alaska, by all means let’s have that discussion.

Sometime in the not so distant future, there will be an attempt to conduct a mass shooting here in Alaska.  The cowardly vermin will choose a free fire zone like a school or university campus.  They won’t choose one with an armed guard like the Capital building in Juneau.  When that attack happens, I wonder what the Moore’s will say. What will their moral authority be worth then?

Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He is a small business owner and Information Technology professional.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.