A misleading claim about California’s proposed self-defense bill, AB 1333, has gone viral on social media.

"New California bill would make self-defense illegal, if you didn't try to ‘Escape The Situation First.’”

This exact message has been copied and pasted repeatedly across X.com, spreading the idea that Californians may soon be required to flee before defending themselves.

Other variations of the claim that the bill would outlaw self defense have also gone viral, but a closer look at AB 1333, introduced by Assembly Member Rick Zbur on February 21st, tells a different story.

Not only would self-defense remain legal in California, the bill imposes no duty to retreat inside a person's home. Instead, it introduces specific restrictions on when lethal force is justified, particularly in public spaces.

What AB 1333 Actually Says

AB 1333 proposes amendments to California Penal Code Section 197, which outlines when homicide is considered justifiable. The most significant changes include:

• Eliminating the "defense of habitation or property” as a legal reason for killing someone.
• Clarifying when lethal force is excessive and not legally justified.
• Requiring a person outside their home to retreat if they can do so safely without using deadly force.

The key portion of the bill states that homicide is not justifiable when:

“The person was outside their residence and knew that using force likely to cause death or great bodily injury could have been avoided with complete safety by retreating.”

This means if you are outside and can escape a dangerous situation without using lethal force, you must do so.

However, the requirement to retreat is for outside only. Inside your home you would still have a broader legal justification to defend yourself or others. The misleading X.com posts fail to mention that homeowners are not required to retreat when facing an imminent threat inside their own residence.

Does the Bill Make Self-Defense Illegal?

No. The bill does not criminalize self-defense, but it limits when homicide is legally justified, particularly outside the home and in public places.

Under current California law, homicide is justifiable "When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person," or "When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person...."

AB 1333 changes that by saying lethal force is only justified in response to a direct physical threat rather than a general trespassing or burglary situation.

The bill also limits self-defense claims in cases where:

• A person provokes an attack or engages in mutual combat.
• A person uses excessive force beyond what was necessary to stop a threat.

However, there is an exception: if a person attempts to withdraw from a fight but is still attacked, they can use self-defense.

Misinformation Campaign? Identical Tweets Raise Questions

The spread of nearly identical tweets, often posted by anonymous or newly created accounts, has led some to speculate whether the misinformation campaign is coordinated.

The viral messaging does not link to the actual bill text or provide legal analysis. Instead, it frames the legislation as a total ban on self-defense, which is false.

Other misleading variations and messaging surrounding AB 1333 include:

None of these claims accurately reflects the bill’s text.

Fact-Check Summary

• Self-defense is still legal under AB 1333.
• The bill does not impose a “duty to retreat” inside your home.
• Homicide is no longer justifiable solely to protect property.
• Using force likely to cause death or great bodily injury is not justified outside your home if you know you can safely escape.
• Numerous X.com posts have spread nearly identical misinformation about the bill.

While AB 1333 does introduce new restrictions on the use of deadly force, the widespread claim that self-defense is illegal without first trying to escape is misleading and lacks legal basis. As the bill moves through the legislative process, accurate reporting and analysis will be crucial to counter misinformation.