Father now wishes he'd shot daughter's attacker

Father wishes he had shot girl's attacker


by Frank Vinluan
Seattle Times Snohomish County bureau
Otto Bruun says that at the time he fired a warning shot to ward off an intruder, he didn't realize the man had choked his daughter unconscious moments earlier.

Had he known, he would have shot the intruder, Bruun said yesterday.

"Every parent I've talked to said they would have shot him. It's the basic instinct to protect your child," said the Marysville man.

A 20-year-old suspect was arrested late last week at a neighbor's home a few blocks away and was booked into the Snohomish County Jail for investigation of assault and burglary, according to the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office.

The county Prosecutor's Office has not yet filed charges.

Bruun awoke Friday around 3:30 a.m. to bumping sounds in his home. He thought the family's cat might have been making them.

But as his son, Ben, yelled for him to grab his gun, he realized it was more serious. Bruun fired one warning shot into a doorjamb to scare the intruder, who was struggling with his son.

"It was just out of control," Bruun said. "I needed something to get them to calm down."

But the shot didn't slow the man down, Bruun said. The intruder continued to struggle, and Bruun said he grabbed him by his sweater.

The man slipped out and ran away, Bruun said.

Bruun found his daughter Maren, 14, lying on the floor. He thought she was dead. Blood covered her mouth and neck, and she wasn't moving, he said. He was about to begin CPR when her eyes fluttered open.

The intruder, who Bruun says was an acquaintance of a friend of his son's, entered through an open garage door.


Bruun said he has had his 9-mm handgun for 10 years. He said this is the only time he's had to use the gun to protect his family, adding, "Guns are as safe as the individuals holding them."

Frank Vinluan's phone message number is 425-745-7814.
 
NEVER EVER fire a Warning Shot.
Its always useless, and it's dangerous... your not likely to be focused enough on where your warning shot is going so you dont want to be resposible for that when it stops.
Also - if a fellow is bad enough to justify a warning - he's bad enough to justify a good shooting.
In the case of an attack in my home in a tussel with my son? When I walked up I wouldnt just be grabbing sweeters... Just call my Vinny...
 
Umm, people, LOCK YOUR DOORS!!! There are people out there looking for just that opportunity.

Warning shots are a very, very bad idea. I think too many people have gotten their firearms training from the film industry.
 
Given the facts reported in the story, would shooting the intruder who was wrestling with the man's son have been a legitimate use of deadly force? There's also the question of how practical it would be to try to shoot the bad guy without hitting the son.
 
Matt,

I was thinking the same thing. How do you respond when there's a good guy and a BG wrestling? I agree the warning shot is a bad idea, but what's the alternative?

Any info from LEOs much appreciated.
 
There is no ideal solution to the problem posed in this situation. I think the shooter did a he// of a good job in a tough situation. I also think he would have justified in shooting the BG after the warning shot failed to stop the attack on his son. Whether he could have hit the BG without endangering his son is the $64,000 question.

But on the plus side, his son and daughter were spared the sight of the bad guy flopping around and bleeding out on the living room rug.

Thanks for posting this item. I would also like the opinion of LEOs on this.

[This message has been edited by Ledbetter (edited April 18, 2000).]
 
I would think that if you came up to a family member struggling with a BG, the only shot would be a contact shot. Keeping the finger off of the trigger, push the barrel into the body of the BG, keeping the direction of the barrel away from the GG, and then pull the trigger.

It would be a down and dirty fight any way you'd look at it.
 
Umm - contact shots have a history of going very wrong. Pretty hideous Portland police story of a innocent getting killed in such a fight.

Better to have good hand to hand skills, separate and then shoot if need be.

Get clear from the guy.

Warning shots are usually bad news also.
 
Shooting the BG would have been justifiable, since the BG was in the home, and was attacking the son (it's hard for burglars to claim self-defense). As for shooting while the struggle was going on, I respectfully submit this may be the one situation in which a warning shot is justified. Assuming you can put one in a safe direction (i.e. through the floor into an unoccupied basement or into the ceiling and a similarly unoccupied attic), fire the warning shot. Then, when the BG jumps to his feet in shock, "perform the indicated response."
 
Having good hand-to-hand skills may not help you in a case like this. Jummping into a tussle with a weapon in your hand is a great way to get shot with your own gun. Command voice and if need be, proper shot placement from just short of contact distance may be the way to go here. I've been in my share of rough-&-tumbles on duty. Weapon retention is always on my mind in such cases. Fighting one-handed is no fun. I have to agree that warning shots are not a great idea, but I think this fellow handled the situation to the best of his ability as he saw fit at the time. Glad it ended as well as it did.

------------------
Tom Whitman
SSgt, USAF
 
There is no way I'd try a shot against a BG struggling with any innocent, much less one of my loved ones. I'm not much of a hunter, but I've done enough to realize how fast the target can move just as you squeeze the trigger.

A warning shot is a bad idea, but was certainly a better alternative than this father trying to hit the BG under these circumstances. And, once the BG turned to flee, the father didn't have cause to use lethal force ... at least, not in AZ.

I'll be interested to see other comments in this thread. One important part of training I have experienced is also learning when not to shoot.

Regards from AZ
 
I think the guy did the best he could. In TX you are allowed, God I hate to use that word, by the State to use deadly force to defend a third party, from imminent death, serious bodily harm or kidnaping. In this case a burglar fighting with a child could easilt qualify as a disparity of force and even an attempted kidnaping. I am not too much in favor of warning shots as you never know what kind of funny bounce a bullet might take. Not only that, but firing a gun indoors without hearing protection could easily disorient the shooter if they are not ready. The last thing I would want is to give someone another window of oppurtunity. This low self esteemed mental midget was not frightened by the warning and required the Dad to remove him from his son. I think I would have preffered a contact shot if possible. I am assuming that this misunderstood yoot was above the son, probably trying to choke him also. If this is the case then there are opportunities for contact shots that are somewhat safe. If this is not the case then Slabsides upside the head might be a way to go. Of course applying liberal dosages.

------------------
"Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes."
-R.A. Heinlein
 
If they are wrestling on the ground, a full-house kick in the ribs or head would be a good idea. If they are "duking it out" tell the GG to get away and perforate the BG at the first sign of pursuit or aggression.
 
That is a tough situation. You've got a man on top of your son, struggling with him, and your daughter on the floor, presumably nearby.
I know we can all shoot well at the range...but are you sure enough that in a room full of friendly's, under that kind of stress, that you could hit a moving target? Tough decision. And...did you load those deep pentrating 147gr 9mm's or the low penetration 155gr +P+? The difference could mean the bullet going through the attacker and into your son, or not.

At least he was smart enough to aim the gun into a door jam. This was a thinking man, and he made a good decision under the circumstnances, although maybe not the best one. The common idiot would have aimed the gun up to the ceiling or to the side in a "safe direction" and fired like they do in the movies....and we all know that dry wall does not stop bullets. This guy was cerebral enough to find a dense object...but not too dense so it does not ricochet...and fire the gun into it.

I have noticed that many people never really consider using the handgun as a point blank weapon. If I were in that situation and it warranted deadly force, I would rush the backside of the guy on my son, place the gun at an angle that the exiting bullet would not hit anyone, and pull the trigger with the muzzle deeply buried in the guy. The gases at that point will do more damage than the bullet.

Ultimatly, in this situation I would favor a good knife. Being well versed in knife use, if someone gives their back and I can close to grappling range, it is all over and I can injure to degree. Even better might be a blunt instrument....but I guess I could sideline quarterback this all I want. Otto Bruun did good, but I do wish he would have eliminated that bad guy from our gene pool.

------------------
"Our cause has been aided by the deaths of all these children in all these schools, and in other settings. And I think we should pay tribute to them." - President Bill Clinton, dancing in the blood of children and pushing his irrelevant gun control laws, April 12, 2000, Scripps Howard News Service Interview
 
I've been training in the martial arts since '94, so I've got some basis. I would never tussle with someone while holding a sidearm if I could help it.

I'm thinking contact or near-contact shot- interject my body between my son and his attacker, and aim low.
 
The Mag-lite stays right next to the ready access safe. If I can't shoot him, I can clobber him. If one did shoot him, no question about it being justified.
 
Two thoughts . ONE : By firing one shot the BG knows that this guy WILL pull the trigger . Not stand there and wet his pants with the gun shaking in his sweaty hand . TWO : Under usual conditions the warning shot should be the SECOND shot .

------------------
TOM SASS MEMBER AMERICAN LEGION MEMBER NRA MEMBER
 
The way I look at it, the Good Guys are all alive and (relatively) unwounded. The critter is, or will be, in custody.

Tactically, how much better could the father have done?

LawDog
 
Tom--I'm glad someone mentioned that the warning shot should be fired second--don't tell anyone tho'.
As far as dealing with the BG--gutshoot at close range,and fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top