Originally outraged, now I am not so sure.
While the article says early on that the shooter did not know the dead man, it turns out, as finally mentioned later in the article, that the wife did!
Also, the use of the term "home invasion" is disingenuous. It is designed to evoke the typical image of a home invasion: armed intruder(s) who come with intent to do bodily harm and/or to rob.
This could well be a domestic disturbance gone bad. Since there are questions in my mind, and since the only article posted clearly is biased in favor of the shooter, I'll withhold judgment pending facts from an impartial source or a biased account from the other direction to compare/contrast with the biased account we now have.