The rampant misinformation regarding stand your ground laws is the fault of media on both sides. They both falsely characterized the laws as saying that a person only needs to feel threatened to use deadly force and that he or she doesn't need to retreat. Of course, that's a gross oversimplification. Hillary Clinton can't just feel threatened by a black guy in a hoodie and shoot him. It has to be a situation in which a reasonable person fears death or severe bodily harm. Still, both sides repeated that characterization ad nauseum after the Trayvon Martin shooting even after it became clear that stand your ground was irrelevant to the case. The difference was only in the inflection the pundits used - Republicans praised the laws and Democrats condemned them.
As a preface, I do have to give credit where credit is due and applaud all two to the Democrats in New York who condemned the DA in no uncertain terms for charging Jose Alba with murder. Of course, the mayor came far short that the governor has said nothing. Most of the reporting is coming from sources that are usually regarded as Right leaning with the exception being CBS. You might think that the New York Times would be on top of the Google searches -- you'd be wrong. And, to be clear, even a moron who still thinks that Kyle Rittenhouse is a murderer would have to be able to see that Alba is innocent.
Still, it seems like Democrats are only talking about this when they directly have to. I think there's a clear politicial reason. Alba is clearly morally innocent; but, because of the restrictions on the right of self-defense that Democrats have been pushing so passionately for the last decade, he could plausibly be legally guilty.
Ya see, Democrats, in the backward hick states like Florida, Texas, and Arizona, Alba wouldn't have spent a day in jail. We have strong stand your ground laws that don't give violent criminals any more of an advantage than they already have.
On the flip side, in your enlightened, progressive states like New York, Massachusetts, and California, if an innocent person who doesn't wish to harm anyone encounters a person who does want to harm or even kill someone, which already gives the criminal an advantage in an altercation, and the criminal is bigger and stronger than his (let's face it, it's usually a dude) the victims are placed at an even greater disadvantage because you've made it almost impossible for law abiding citizens to arm themselves and you're commanding them to find a way to prove that they exhausted all other options while somebody is trying to kill them. In New York, if a bad guy wants to kill you or beat you to a bloody pulp, your choice is to let him and beg for mercy or use a weapon and spend the rest of your life in prison.
Democrats aren't talking about this because we have it on video that duty to retreat laws are evil and make no sense. God forbid that they acknowledge that they were wrong and change policies so that citizens have the ability to protect themselves if and when they need to.