this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
407 points (94.9% liked)

News

23301 readers
4608 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] holycrapwtfatheism@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Genuinely curious if you had someone smashing your window and trying to enter your house forcefully what your response would be.

[–] Slwh47696@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Phone the police and tell him to fuck off? Maybe hit their arm with a bat or something. If I was alone I could even just leave. Not immediately execute them.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

I dont have any guns so probly hiding and calling cops. But also I dont live in any other developed country, Im not blaming the homeowner for fearing for his life in the country with more guns than people. If we were somewhere else, not only would the homeowner not have a gun, anyone trying to break in would be much less likely to have one.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well where I live there aren't nearly as many guns so the person breaking in would be less likely to have a deadly weapon and it would be a bit less risky to just call the police and hide, or comply with the (assumed) robber, or I'd feel like I'd have a better chance with using a blunt weapon like a bat to protect myself and drive them off, which would be less likely to kill someone. But where I live there are also a lot less robberies in general.

Doesn't guarantee nobody would have died if the same thing happened in a place with less gun violence, but it might have reduced the chances. Even if people get into the same kinds of confrontations, if there aren't guns involved the chances of everyone surviving a violent encounter goes up by a significant percentage. Less guns in a country over-all means less chances for a conflict to have a gun involved.

[–] Resolved3874@lemdro.id 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean if I take a swing at someone's head with a baseball bat I'm probably just as likely to kill as I would be by shooting them. I will say baseball bat to the head probably hits less since it would probably render you unconscious immediately.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean if I take a swing at someone's head with a baseball bat I'm probably just as likely to kill as I would be by shooting them.

You'd be surprised. While one hit can kill, concussion/brain injury without death is generally more common from a single hit. Usually it takes multiple hits to guarantee killing someone, and it's harder to aim if you're not like, a baseball player, than most people expect. You're more likely to get a glancing blow, even assuming you catch the other person by surprise. The type of bat can make a difference in how likely it is to kill from a first hit as well.

[–] Resolved3874@lemdro.id 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah I guess that's all true. Either way I personally would prefer a gun to a baseball bat for self defense for the simple fact that it puts me in less danger than attacking my attacker with a melee weapon. There admittedly isn't much in my house that is worth my life but apparently the person breaking in values my things more than their own life.

[–] robbotlove@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

probably depends on if guns are involved or not.

[–] Iteria@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is such an annoying answer. I've had a strange man enter my home unannounced. I remember standing just behind a wall with intent to stab him with the knife I had because if someone breaks into your house you don't assume a good time. Even without guns strangers are dangerous. That maintenance guy was seriously lucky I happen to recognize him in that split sec and stopped before stabbing him in the chest.

I'm American and I've never worried about guns. They aren't as common as people think in a lot of areas. Mostly we have a few yahoo's with a shitton of guns and most people with zero. I've still been in several situations where I felt unsafe without guns even being a consideration. If this dude was doing all that at my house, I'd call the police and then wait with a knife like I did with that stupid maintenance guy I almost stabbed who should have known better.

[–] pwalshj@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That maintenance guy is an idiot. I worked maintenance for years and you never enter someone's home without ringing or knocking and waiting for a reply (even if they say the home will be empty). When you do unlock the door you open it slowly while calling out, "Hello! Maintnance!" I'd say 30% of the time someoine was there when I was assured the property would be empty. Kid skipping school, home sick and forgot our appoinment, etc.

[–] Iteria@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

You are correct. That's why I didn't assume maintenence guy, but instead rapist.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To be fair, here's the thing. If you replace a gun with a knife, while that doesn't erase the chance of death by any means, it does lower the chance of death significantly. Because despite what a lot of people might think, in a fight, you're a lot more likely to survive if your attacker has a knife than you would if your attacker has a gun. If you hadn't recognized your maintenance guy right away and attacked him, then he'd still be better off with you wielding a knife than if you'd been wielding a gun instead.

And in a country with less guns, both you and a potential robber are less likely to have guns. Maybe you would use a knife, but clearly not everyone would, and saying "there's not as many as you'd think in a lot of areas areas" is all fine and well, but the statistics show that the US has an absolutely mind boggling amount of guns per capita compared to any other country. The US literally has more guns than people. In other countries, it's not just in some areas where guns are less common, it's every area, and most have less than even the areas in US's that have less guns. Countries that are literally at war have less guns per capita than the US does.

Obviously that doesn't mean you'll never be in danger without any guns around, but you will generally be in less danger over-all, and even when you do get into danger you will still be less likely to die.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Gunshots are actually less deadly than knife wounds btw.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's not true, gunshot wounds actually have a significantly lower survival rate than stab wounds. I can provide some studies on the topic if you're interested.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Can you support that statement...?

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago
[–] vinceman@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 year ago

Lot more likely to shoot somebody before you have a chance to stop vs stabbing them.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

People don't just drop when they get stabbed and a stronger person can pretty easily take a knife from a weaker one. If you're trying to defend yourself from a real attacker with a knife you're probably going to have a bad time.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Mostly we have a few yahoo’s with a shitton of guns and most people with zero.

How do you know that? Are there actually stats on that? I'm a left-leaning gun owner, and I'm careful to avoid talking about guns around most people to avoid unnecessary conflict. The people who make it their entire personality are a very vocal minority.

[–] Iteria@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because I've lived in shitty areas with actual drug dealers and BS like that. Less people have guns than you might imagine. Maybe it's different in nowhere USA, but in urban shithole, USA and Middle class suburbia that's about what I've found. People have like 3+ guns or none at all. I guess it's possible all my friends are just hiding this from me for some reason and in my hometown I just happen to know all the people who shoot guns, but honestly it's been rare that I've seen people with just one gun. It's not that I've never seen it. My cousin's husband owns exactly one gun.

I don't think there's any way to get stats, but I think that the US has more guns than people lends some credibility to this idea.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

So it's all anecdotal, and based on what people tell you? Like I said, gun nuts are a very vocal minority.

And I've lived in a slum too. An apartment in the building I lived in was basically a trap house, a neighbor was stabbed on his way home from work, my gf's vehicle was stolen, my vehicle was vandalized, and someone tried to enter my apartment because he was drunk and confused. And after all of that, I still have no idea how many of my neighbors had guns because most sensible gun owners don't advertise the fact.

[–] Mobiuthuselah@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

::gasp:: Actual drug dealers??

[–] blazera@kbin.social -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

this uh...this story just kind of reinforces how bad of an idea guns are, cus you would have killed a guy who also wasnt trying to kill you.

[–] bi_tux@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Depending on the gun they maybe wouldn't have killded him, even if they hit them. Also if you are already jumping at someone with a knife, it's not that much easier to stop than a gunshot.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes it is. Take a look at gun homicides vs knife. Guns are more deadly and we have the deaths to prove it.

[–] Tavarin@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Stab wounds are far less deadly, and far more treatable compared to gunshot wounds.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago

You're right, and there are lots of studies backing this up. Even if you compare similar wounds like neck wounds from stabbing vs getting shot, and getting stabbed in the heart vs being shot in the heart. Stab wound victims are much more likely to survive than gunshot wound victims.