A University of South Carolina student was shot and killed as he apparently tried to enter the wrong home on his off-campus street early on Saturday, police said.

Nicholas Anthony Donofrio, 20, of Connecticut, was dead by the time police responded to reports of a home burglary and shooting, according to a Columbia Police Department news release. Officers found his body on a front porch around 2 a.m., and Donofrio had a gunshot wound to his upper body, the release said.

  • GiddyGap
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Crime usually has root causes like poverty, inequality, poor education, etc.

    If you look at Europe, the crime rate is much lower than in the US. Gun violence is near non-existent outside of gang-related crime.

    Most of Europe would be deep, deep blue if transferred to the US political scale. They have heavy gun control and redistribution of wealth results in much less financial inequality. In turn, it causes much lower crime rates.

    I don’t think US crime rates have anything to do with culture. It has to do with rampant inequality and easy access to weapons. Combine that with mental health issues, and you got a real toxic cocktail.

      • GiddyGap
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Europe has a lot of petty theft issues. Always have had.

        In this thread, we were specifically talking about gun violence, which is through the roof in the US and almost non-existent in Europe. It’s also the most dangerous type of crime, which often turns otherwise non-violent, petty crimes deadly.

        And for some reason, conservatives don’t want to look at the tools being used for gun violence. The guns.

        • Neuromancer
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most of the people killing each other are not conservatives. As a conservative, I don’t want to restrict my constitutional rights. I would prefer we focused on solving the crime issue. In the 90’s, Biden pushed for longer prison sentences, more police, and more enforcement of the laws, which saw our murder rate decline. We need to do that again.

          • GiddyGap
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            As a progressive, I’d prefer to look at the tools that enable the gun violence: The guns. It’s just very clear that the US has an enormous problem with gun violence compared to other parts of the developed world. The thing that stands out is obviously easy access to weapons.

            Fresh example: Jacksonville, where a rightwing nut went ballistic with an AR-15 in a racist rampage. Weapons bought legally, since he seemed like “one of the good guys with a gun.”

            Sorry, but I’m not willing to sacrifice school kids and my fellow Americans’ lives to defend some “right” invented in a completely different time with very different types of weapons available.

              • GiddyGap
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m all for an amendment.

                I just find it unreal that conservatives defend their guns over the lives of children. Especially after what we’ve seen in Uvalde and Sandy Hook and Columbine, etc. Zero change. Unreal.

                • Neuromancer
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It is a false argument. Firearms rarely kill children.

                  The left wants to defund the police, as such, that means I need to defend myself from crime.

                  You can’t have it both ways. You either need to have more police or allow the citizens to defend themselves. It’s why I moved out of the blue city to a red city. I would rather have a strong police force to defend my from crime rather than have to carry a firearm to defend myself.

                  • GiddyGap
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Firearms rarely kill children.

                    So, not reaction to Uvalde, Columbine, Sandy Hook? Nothing? Seems on par.

                    You seem completely blind to anything outside the US.

                    Create happy populations and you don’t need any of it. Europeans don’t have guns and they don’t have the violent police forces you see in the US. Yet, they are the happiest populations on earth year after year. Highly productive, highly educated.

                    Great equality. Create opportunity. Get rid of the desperation.

                  • PoliticalAgitator
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Firearms rarely kill children.

                    People rarely fuck your wife when you’re at work. What number is acceptable for you then?

                    Since she’s not my wife, I’m comfortable insisting that a few hundred is nothing to get upset about. It’s only a tiny fraction of the overall population.

                  • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Firearms rarely kill children?

                    Hundreds of children have died after being shot at school since Sandy Hook alone. Hundreds. That was only 13 years ago.

                    In that same period, do you know how many children died after being shot at school in Europe? It’s a number between 0 and 0.

              • PoliticalAgitator
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                To change it, you would need an amendment and that would be hard to pass.

                Getting easier every day. Do you think the kids are going to forget you sold them out to the gun lobby? Do you think they won’t vote?

                The pro-gun crowd has proven themselves completely incapable of addressing the danger to society their hobby creates. When they no longer have the power they need to stop progress, they’re going to be shown exactly the level of compassion they showed victims of gun violence and traumatised children.

                If they want to get all “cold dead hands” about it, they can go right ahead and die in a hail of bullets after firing on police. As far as I’m concerned, that’s just the consequences finally meeting the cause.

                • Neuromancer
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Maybe you don’t understand how hard it would be.

                  You’d need 2/3 of the states to pass an amendments. It’s not happening anytime soon.

      • PoliticalAgitator
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Did you even make it to the end of that paper? It openly states that the discrepancies could be due to flawed data or that fact that widespread firearm ownership has resulted in criminals that will straight up execute you if things get out of hand.

        Congratulations, you traded “having your phone stolen” for “having your child die screaming in agony on their classroom floor because a legal gun owner shot them in the spine”.

        • Neuromancer
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m fine with the compromise. All studies point out possible flaws. Nothing new.

          • PoliticalAgitator
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course you are, you think it proves you right. You’d be fine with it being written in crayon.

            The rest of us are justifiably more skeptical about a paper that doesn’t say what you imply it says and mispells “firearms” in the very first paragraph.