Lawmakers in California are facing intense criticism over a bill that would severely restrict homeowners’ self-defense rights, requiring them to flee their homes before defending themselves with deadly force against trespassers. According to Assembly Bill 1333, which Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur introduced, Californians must try every escape route before resorting to lethal force in self-defense. Homeowners are purposefully discouraged from exercising their constitutional right to life by the bill. In response to strong public criticism, Zbur has pledged to change the bill, saying it solely targets “wannabe vigilantes” like Kyle Rittenhouse.
Law Enforcement Officials Lead Opposition to “Ridiculous” Self-Defense Bill
Opposition to California’s Assembly Bill 1333 is mounting rapidly, with sheriffs across the state leading the charge against what they see as a dangerous assault on citizens’ right to self-defense. The controversial legislation would eliminate certain justifiable homicide circumstances and require homeowners to exhaust all possible escape routes before using lethal force against intruders—even in their own homes.
Tehama County Sheriff Dave Kain didn’t mince words about the proposal: “We are swinging so far outside the realm of what is reasonable by telling people now that under certain circumstances, they can’t protect themselves in their own home against a criminal element, which is probably one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard of.”
Butte County Sheriff Kory Honea similarly blasted the bill, describing it as “a solution looking for a problem to solve.” Honea warned that the legislation “would negatively impact a person’s inalienable right to defend themselves or others against attack” and creates an “unreasonable and subjective standard for people who legitimately fear for their lives. It’s another example of how legislators in Sacramento create bad public policy that favors criminals and penalizes victims.”
What Mike drop? Medicaid hasn’t been cut. And, democrats idea of “gun reform” is denying the right of law abiding citizens to use firearms to protect themselves and their families.https://t.co/281u7gr6CO
— Mark Miller (@PatientType) March 5, 2025
Bill Author Attempts Damage Control
Following intense backlash, the bill’s author, Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur, has been scrambling to defend his legislation and promising amendments. Zbur claims the bill isn’t meant to restrict homeowners’ rights but rather to prevent what he calls “wannabe vigilantes” from abusing self-defense claims after provoking violence.
Zbur’s mention of Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted of all charges in his high-profile self-defense case, has only intensified opposition from law enforcement and Second Amendment advocates. Critics point out that the bill’s actual language contradicts Zbur’s stated intentions, as it would require even innocent homeowners to retreat from their own homes before defending themselves against intruders.
California bill would require homeowners to 'exhaust every reasonable means to escape' prior to confronting home invader with deadly force—or face homicide charges
"So the homeowner would have to determine within seconds or whatever, why a stranger suddenly showed up inside… pic.twitter.com/yKgObgnmWA
— Trump2024_no_matter_what (@TexasTrump2024) March 2, 2025
Bill’s Specifics Draw Criticism
The details of AB 1333 have alarmed many Californians. The bill would eliminate justification for homicide in defense of property and impose new restrictions on self-defense claims. Critics argue it fundamentally undermines the Castle Doctrine, which traditionally allows people to defend themselves in their homes without a duty to retreat—despite supporters’ claims to the contrary.
“I don’t know how you could modify it that would make it any other way than the way that I read it, which is that we are trying to make it illegal to defend yourself in your own home.” – Sheriff Kain
The legislation would specifically require citizens to prove they faced imminent danger and had no safe retreat option before using deadly force. It would also restrict self-defense claims for those engaged in mutual combat or who initiate confrontations—provisions that critics say create ambiguity that could be exploited to prosecute legitimate self-defense cases.
Growing Political Battle
While gun control advocacy groups like Moms Demand Action support the bill, claiming it promotes de-escalation, the opposition continues to grow. Sheriff Kain indicated that California’s 58 sheriffs would be discussing a unified response at their next meeting. Meanwhile, Riverside County Sheriff and gubernatorial candidate Chad Bianco placed the bill in a broader political context.
“Sacramento Democrats have spent the last 15 years tying the hands of law enforcement and coddling criminals, using and abusing ordinary Californians in their attempt to make criminals the real victims.” – Chad Bianco
Despite Zbur’s promises to amend the bill, skepticism remains high among law enforcement and Second Amendment advocates. As currently written, many believe AB 1333 would place California homeowners in an impossible position: choosing between fleeing their own homes or facing potential prosecution for defending themselves against violent intruders. The growing opposition suggests significant changes will be needed before the bill can advance further in the legislature.