The homeowner who fatally shot a 20-year-old University of South Carolina student who tried to enter the wrong home on the street he lived on Saturday morning will not face charges because the incident was deemed “a justifiable homicide” under state law, Columbia police announced Wednesday.

Police said the identity of the homeowner who fired the gunshot that killed Nicholas Donofrio shortly before 2 a.m. Saturday will not be released because the police department and the Fifth Circuit Solicitor’s Office determined his actions were justified under the state’s controversial “castle doctrine” law, which holds that people can act in self-defense towards “intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others.”

  • seejur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Regardless of how drunk you are, you should not get shot for a silly mistake which endangered no one. Gun laws and this obsession of defending private property in ALL cases is simply stupid. Losing your life because you got drunk is stupid

    • FlowVoid@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It wasn’t a “silly” mistake.

      I’ve been drunk plenty of times, but I’ve never smashed through a window and reached through broken glass to try to open a locked door. Most drunk people know better than to literally break into a house.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well technically, calling 911 on a break in is just outsourcing the shooting, so imo he can’t even call the men with guns to use the guns he doesn’t think should be used.

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Like any cop WANTS to shoot and kill a person.

            TBF I’m sure some do, the job does seem to attract some unsavory characters sometimes. Most in my area are alright tbh but we have a guy or two that seem like they’re just itching for the chance and they’re so mad that you have any rights.

            Still though, yeah, outsourcing violence because you’re afraid to defend yourself is one thing, but taking the option away from others is another thing entirely. My gripe is that in either case the potential for violence exists and to persecute one for doing it themselves vs outsourcing it to the police is a wishy washy bullshit stance, it is either justified or not and the uniform isn’t the deciding factor.