The (Fort Wayne) Journal Gazette
Two personal disputes this summer got a lot of attention, not because they ended in shootings but because of where those shootings occurred: Glenbrook Square. In both incidents, one man shot another in the leg. Suspects have been arrested in both incidents.
Thankfully, neither shooting proved fatal, and no bystanders were injured. But there are ripple effects every time someone in Fort Wayne is shot. And when the shooting happens during business hours in northeast Indiana’s largest mall, the damage goes well beyond the suffering of the victim.
These were not, thank goodness, random attacks by would-be mass killers. That is cold comfort to shoppers in the moments after gunfire erupts in a place where gunfire should never be heard.
“There are innocent bystanders around,” notes Paul Helmke, the former Fort Wayne mayor and a professor of practice at Indiana University’s O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. “It’s not going to matter to you if you’re shot by somebody who’s just a random mass shooter or somebody who’s just a bad shot who’s dealing with a personal spat.”
In both incidents, shoppers and employees were forced to shelter in place or flee, and the mall was closed for the balance of the day. It is impossible to guess how much revenue retailers lost, or how many customers might not soon return.
“This to me is a consequence of having a state policy saying, ‘Let’s get more loaded guns in more places,’ ” said Helmke, a nationally known advocate for sensible gun laws. “You put more loaded guns into more hands, you’re going to have these situations.”
But rational restrictions on how guns are acquired or who gets to carry them are not possible in today’s Indiana. We must find other ways to protect our city and its private and public institutions.
One suggestion: More of what’s already in place.
It’s encouraging to see that Glenbrook’s management has been working with law enforcement to improve safety by increasing the number of off-duty police working security at the mall and installing more security cameras. The mall already prohibits weapons on its premises.
Guns-for-all advocates say such rules creating “gun-free zones” attract crazed armed people who could kill without fear of being stopped by a “good guy with a gun.” For argument, let’s accept the premise that mad, often suicidal killers make such rational calculations. And let’s acknowledge that on occasion, an armed, competent private citizen is on the scene to stop the killer. The young man who confronted and killed a mass shooter at Indiana’s Greenwood Park Mall, for instance, was rightly hailed a hero.
But the chance that a random “good guy” saves the day must be balanced against the possibility of collateral damage to bystanders or the creation of a dangerous distraction for trained police officers. Enforcing rules to keep guns out of vulnerable institutions – coupled with more well-trained security officers or police on such premises – might offer a better chance of success. It’s an approach that has worked for airports, courthouses and, ironically, the Indiana Statehouse.
Rather than hide them in the fine print, Glenbrook and other private institutions with no-gun rules should consider displaying them boldly – even noting their presence in promotional materials. Today, visitor and employee safety has become a marketable commodity.
Such programs might be boosted if the legislature tweaked the laws to make it a crime to enter a no-weapons establishment carrying a gun. Right now, it’s only a rude and oafish thing to do – though such an oaf can be asked to leave.
Quality of life, that secret sauce of a successful city, means fine parks and running trails and broad options for education, enlightenment and entertainment. But it also means police, business operators and other citizens doing everything we can to preserve a sense of safety at Glenbrook and the other places where people and families gather.
