Looks like the DA’s association has softened their opposition, but the reason is worrisome:
Now, Marsico says the DAâ€™s Association is working with, and not against, Republican lawmakers, in an effort to change the billâ€™s language. New language the group helped craft would only eliminate the duty to retreat before firing if the other person is armed. â€œIt also provides that the individual who wants to avail themselves of the expanded doctrine cannot be engaged in any criminal activity,â€ he said. â€œAnd prior versions of the legislation put the onus on the prosecution to prove there was no criminal activity. Weâ€™ve removed that with the current amendment.â€Â He outlined one more change: â€œThe other thing in the current amendment does is that it provides that if someoneâ€™s going to claim the expanded stand your ground doctrine, and they use a firearm in defending themselves, then they have to be legally in possession of that firearm. So weâ€™ve tightened the law a lot.â€
I will do my best to look into this, but this could be cause for concern. I need to look at this year’s and last year’s bills side by side, but I’m pretty sure most of what they are speaking of here is already a feature of last year’s bill, IIRC.