AB 1333 is Dead: Assemblyman Zbur Withdraws Bill Limiting Self-Defense

Assemblyman Rick Zbur (D-Los Angeles) announced late on Wednesday that he would be withdrawing his new self-defense limitation bill following significant public backlash and confusing language in the bill.

Assembly Bill 1333, which was introduced last month, would have eliminated certain circumstances under which homicide is justifiable, including, among others, in defense of a habitation or property. The bill would have also additionally clarified circumstances in which homicide is not justifiable, including, among others, when a person uses more force than necessary to defend against a danger.

Zbur said that AB 1333 would simply close a “legal loophole” over public confrontations and then claiming self-defense. However, AB 1333 instead sparking public outrage. Many pointed out that the bill would severely limit self defense against crime and leave open questions into when homicide was and wasn’t legal.

“This bill is a complete assault on self defense!” said Assemblyman Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) last month. “Imagine this: A violent criminal breaks into your home, and YOU have to second-guess whether defending your family is ‘justifiable.’ The misguided energy behind this proposal is beyond comprehension.”

Flooded with criticism from both Republicans and some Democrats, Zbur swiftly responded on X, saying that he wanted to target vigilantes and that AB 1333 would be amended soon to clarify the bill language.

“AB 1333 was never intended to limit a crime victim’s right to defend yourself, your family, or home,” Zbur posted on X. “The goal is to prevent wannabe vigilantes like Kyle Rittenhouse from provoking violence & claiming self defense after the fact. We will amend the bill to make this crystal clear.”

However, this did little to stop the growing amount of criticism. By early March county sheriffs from across California and crime victim groups joined in, furthering the backlash. While bill supporters continued to defend it, AB 1333 was seen by many as beyond repair. This led to Wednesday when Assemblyman Zbur officially pulled the bill, withdrawing it following committee placement and a final amendment.

AB 1333 withdrawn

“Protecting public safety has always been my top priority,” said Zbur on Wednesday. “AB 1333 sought to close a dangerous legal loophole that could allow armed aggressors to initiate confrontations in public, kill their victims, and then exploit self-defense laws to escape accountability. The bill does not change the long-standing Castle Doctrine and was never intended to affect anyone’s ability to protect themselves, their family, or their home. As a father and as the victim of a home invasion myself, I understand how essential the right to self defense is.

“Unfortunately, misleading information has fueled fear and confusion about the bill. I have decided to withdraw AB 1333 from further consideration once it is referred to committee on Thursday and has been amended to clarify items that caused confusion. I remain committed to keeping our communities safe and will continue working with law enforcement, legal experts, and public and gun safety advocates to advance smart policies that protect victims and safeguard the right to self defense. I want to thank our law enforcement partners and gun safety groups for their unwavering dedication to public safety and their hard work on this effort.”

While Zbur maintains that “misleading information” caused the bill to fail, many on Thursday cited that the bill’s language on limiting self-defense, an expanding tougher on crime movement in the state, and a growing number of lawmakers from both parties opposing the bill in Sacramento brought AB 1333 to its demise.

“The defeat of AB 1333 is a victory for common sense and self-defense rights,” explained Assemblyman Lackey to the Globe on Thursday. “But instead of admitting that this bill was deeply flawed, the author is now smearing opponents as ‘misleading.’ Californians saw the truth—this bill was dangerous, and it deserved to fail.”

“Zbur tried to pull a fast one, was caught, then tried to say it was all for, what was it, public safety?” added Frank Ma, a former law enforcement official who now works as a security advisor for businesses in San Francisco and cities in the Peninsula, to the Globe on Thursday. “Ask yourself, if the bill was supposed to stop vigilantes, then why did so many law enforcement officials denounce the law? Why is he amending the bill yet still withdrawing it if it was supposed to clarify everything?

“It was obvious what this bill was trying to do. Hopefully now it isn’t brought back. Californians today want tougher crime laws and to defend themselves if they need to. This was way off the mark.”