madwildcat wrote:Following Dannyboy's line of logic, it would seem to me that this kind of bill would contradict the whole "castle doctrine" concept. I am no legal scholar, but how exactly would both of these laws being on the books at the same time work? Or is the assumption that the new would just preempt that part of the old laws?
That was the exact intent of the bill introduced, not only to decimate the castle doctrine but also "stand your ground" The bill was so poorly written that theoretically if someone became offended by something you said, they could claim to be provoked, and attack you in your home, and then you would face penalties for defending yourself.
Fortunately this bill never made any headway and was killed quickly