The bill provides for punishments of 20 years or more for a home invasion and would open the door to a death penalty case if someone dies during the invasion.The bill distinguishes between a burglary where there's nobody home at the time, and home invasions where people are home. It also covers a drive-by shooting under the notion that bullets and projectiles are an invasion. This is in response to invasions where scumbags rape and murder the homeowners, and is understandable to a degree. I don't disagree with making the perpetrator in home invasions and drive-bys serve longer sentences, but I don't have a good feeling about applying the death penalty for such things. For one, the powers-that-be have a tendency to throw the book and the kitchen sink at criminals for non-violent crimes, and the idea that a burglar who breaks into a home thinking nobody is there when they in fact are, and statutorily gets the death penalty is beyond extreme. Second, it can't be said with certainty that state governments always send the guilty scumbag to their death; it generally can't be proven, but I don't know anyone who, in their heart, isn't convinced that innocent people at times are executed. Adding another reason to give someone the death penalty doesn't sit well with me.
For the violent scumbags who do rape and murder, there's already the death penalty available for that as far as I know. Maybe though the risk of being killed by the state if you're caught breaking into occupied homes will be enough to convince criminals to take up panhandling or something. Who knows. It's unknown whether the law takes grey areas into consideration like squatters and drunks. You may shake your head, but drunk people do some weird things, and just because they find their way into your home doesn't mean that they should automatically be killed for their stupidity, though getting shot in the dark by a scared homeowner is a different matter.