After weeks of cricitism from Second Amendment groups, gun owners, and some members of law enforcement, a California assemblyman has reversed course and yanked a bill from consideration that would have brought sweeping changes to the state's self-defense statutes. 

Assemblyman Rick Zbur, however, felt the heat instead of seeing the light on the fundamental flaws in AB 1333. Even as he announced he was pulling the bill from consideration, he blamed "misinformation" from gun owners for the legislation's untimely demise instead of owning up to the life-endangering changes he wanted to codify into law.

“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.”

What Zbur describes as a "legal loophole" that would essentially give the green light to murder is in reality a lack of a duty to retreat in the face of the threat of great bodily harm or imminent death. And even the amended version of AB 1333 that Zbur briefly brought forward before pulling the legislation from consideration contained a section that would require individuals who are being attacked to try to run away instead of being able to stand their ground and defend themselves. 

AB 1333 has been withdrawn. That doesn't mean something like this won't arise again, they'll probably wait for the next antigun hysteria and try and ram it through then. But for now, that's a big win for everyone who opposed it, good job!

Before withdrawing it, Assemblyman Zbur… pic.twitter.com/7ahj9yDF0c

— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) March 14, 2025

Moros calls the duty to retreat requirement "morally repugnant", and that's most certainly the case. But it's also a legally dangerous mandate, and one that's entirely subjective. An individual acting in self-defense may not believe that he or she was able to retreat to safety instead of standing their ground and defending themselves, but if an overzealous and anti-gun prosecutor decided otherwise the armed citizen could still face murder charges.

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.”

We'll be talking more about the defeat of AB 1333 (and the gun control bills that are still making progress in Sacramento) with California Rifle & Pistol Association legislative affairs director Rick Travis on Monday's Bearing Arms' Cam & Co, and I'm sure that Rick will have plenty to say about Zbur's attack on the right to self-defense and the diverse group of Californians who coalesced in opposition to AB 1333. Second Amendment advocates in the Golden State should be cheered by the defeat of Zbur's bill, but there are still several egregious infringements on our right to keep and bear arms that are making their way through the legislature, and there's much more work to be done to prevent California's gun laws from getting even worse in the weeks ahead.  

Editor's Note: Victories like this wouldn't be possible without the involvement of gun owners in California and throughout the country. Here at Bearing Arms, we're not only informing our readers of the threats to their Second Amendment rights, but helping to give them the tools they need to defeat these anti-gun bills. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership, and help us keep spreading the news about the latest infringements on our right to keep and bear arms.