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.”

    • Silverseren@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone breaking into your house? You have no idea what kind of weapon (including a gun themselves) someone who is physically breaking into your house has.

      • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then why are you firing on them if you have a gun and you haven’t taken other steps to protect yourself. Blind firing is not self defense its irresponsible and caused the death of an innocent kid

      • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Except this person was not there to break in. And if the home owner took steps to meet the actual threat with a proportional response then he wouldn’t have killed the kid. Anything from shouting for the person to leave, to leaving the home and calling the police to also announcing he was armed and will shoot all could have prevented this. Which is why so many places have laws in place for this reason. This was a preventable death.

        • random65837@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Except this person was not there to break in

          Except he DID do that! So nice try.

          Would you make the same excuse when some drunk got behind the wheel and mowed down a bunch of kids? I mean, he wasn’t “there to do that” he was just trying to get home from the bar right? How about when one of those kids were yours? He had a good excuse, his INTENT was to just go home, so all is forgiven right?

          I’m honestly jealous of the make believe world you people mentally live in.

          • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            His intention was not to break in to someone else’s home. He was at the wrong home. Your example involves people being hurt which makes the example bad for this context. You stretched it pretty far and then accused me of playing make believe. Impressive