Defending your home and yourself. At issue, when and where is it OK to use deadly force in self defense?

That's the question, Nebraska state senators are trying to answer again in a bill heard by the Legislature's Judiciary Committee.

It's a bill nicknamed the Castle doctrine light, a modified version of the Castle Doctrine bill these senators have heard several times in the last four years.

Omaha Senator Scott Lautenbaugh sponsored the bill. He told the Judiciary Committee Wednesday, "It's meant to provide clarity as to what your rights are of individuals to protect themselves in their homes and their cars."

His bill hits on three main issues.

Rod Moeller testified in favor of the bill. He is the Vice President of the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association and says, "This is adding the presumption that they are forcefully entering your home while you're there, you can presume that they are there to cause ill harm, they aren't there for a good valid reason."

But Deputy Chief David Baker of the Omaha Police Department testified against the bill. He tells 10/11, "It adds a forcible entry to the home and the automobile and that can be ambiguous or somewhat concerning. But it also creates an exception for presence in the home it takes away the requirement for being in fear for your life or the lives of others."

That's why the department and the Nebraska County Attorney's association aren't supporting the bill as written.

Baker adds, "We believe it's lowering the bar on the use of deadly force."

Amy Prenda testified on behalf of the NE County Attorney's Association and says, "They feel it's too broad."

Senator Lautenbaugh's bill adds vehicles to a place where you can use deadly force for self defense.

Andy Allen the President of the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association says, "This stems from truck drivers in Nebraska that park their rigs in rest areas to sleep at night. There were several truck drivers that asked for that to be added."

LB 804 also provides immunity from some civil cases.

Moeller says, "If they have found you in no violation of criminal law, then there's no reason for someone to go after you."

But Amanda McGill argued during the hearing, "You said you're trying to solve a problem, but I'm wondering how big of a problem this really is."

Now the committee must decide whether to advance the bill.