Keith Mack
California's previous laws allowed police officers to use deadly force in a broad range of circumstances. However, recent bills, such as AB 392, aim to address this issue by limiting the use of deadly force to situations where there are no alternatives to prevent death or serious injury. This shift in legislation is a response to the high rates of officer-involved shootings in the state, with a particular focus on reducing the disproportionate impact of police violence on Black and brown communities. California's new law emphasizes the necessity of de-escalation and the consideration of less lethal alternatives before resorting to deadly force. The effectiveness of these updated standards will be tested in court cases across the state, with only a small percentage of officers currently completing the voluntary training on the new deadly force law.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Current laws | Police can use deadly force regardless of whether it was necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury |
| Proposed bills | AB 392, AB 931 |
| Requirements for police to use deadly force | Only when there are no alternatives that would prevent death or serious bodily injury |
| Previous laws | Police could use deadly force in obedience of a court judgment, when necessary to overcome resistance to the execution of some legal process, when necessary to capture felons who have escaped, or when necessary to arrest a person charged with a felony and fleeing or resisting such arrest |
| Police training | Only 12% of California officers have completed the two-hour, state-certified course on the new deadly force law |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
California's previous law allowed police to use deadly force when reasonable
> "Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use objectively reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance."
This allowed for a broad range of justified police killings, including when:
- In obedience of a court judgment
- Necessary to overcome resistance to the execution of some legal process
- Necessary to capture felons who have escaped
- Necessary to arrest a person charged with a felony and fleeing or resisting such arrest
California case law further clarified the parameters of when deadly force was reasonable. California courts adopted the Garner standard, which states that a police officer's use of deadly force is reasonable if there is probable cause to believe that a suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to an officer or others.
However, this previous law failed to protect against unnecessary killings by police officers, as officers could use deadly force regardless of whether it was necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury. This led to the introduction of AB 392, The California Act to Save Lives, which aims to clarify that police officers can use deadly force only when there are no alternatives that would prevent death or serious bodily injury.
Who Enforces the Law? States' Powers Examined
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The new law states it must be necessary
California's new law on the use of deadly force by police officers is an attempt to address the ""brutal reality and deadly consequences of police violence". The legislation, known as AB 392 or The California Act to Save Lives, updates the state's deadly use-of-force law and clarifies that police officers can use deadly force only when necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury. The new law states it "must be necessary", embodying the three main principles of self-defence doctrine: necessity, proportionality and imminence.
The previous law allowed officers to use deadly force in a much broader range of circumstances, including when necessary to overcome resistance to the execution of a legal process, or to arrest a fleeing suspect. Under the new law, deadly force is justified only when an officer is defending against an imminent threat of death or serious injury. The law also specifically limits the use of deadly force against people who are fleeing, stating that it is only permitted if the fleeing person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another if they are not apprehended.
The new law also requires officers to try to de-escalate conflicts and mandates that they exhaust all reasonably available alternatives before using deadly force. This includes issuing a verbal warning, repositioning and calling for backup, or using lower levels of force. The legislation is based on best practices already in place in some departments in the US, which have been shown to work to reduce killings by police.
The new law has been praised by some as making a "clear difference", but its effectiveness has been questioned due to inconsistent training of officers on the new legislation. Only 12% of California officers had completed a two-hour, state-certified course on the new deadly force law as of March 2022.
Parking Laws: Police Authority and Enforcement
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![California Evidence Code [2025 Edition]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51pz4ogrvOL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
Officers must try de-escalation and use less-lethal alternatives first
California has the highest rate of officer-involved shootings in the nation. In 2017, police shot and killed 162 people in California, with only half of them armed with guns. California police departments have some of the highest rates of killings in the nation. As a result, California lawmakers have been pushed to change the standard for when police can use deadly force.
The ACLU of California and its partner organizations, including those led by people directly impacted by police violence, are supporting AB 392: The California Act to Save Lives. This legislation specifically addresses police violence by updating California's deadly use-of-force law. The bill clarifies that police officers can use deadly force only when there are no alternatives that would prevent death or serious bodily injury.
The bill AB 392 also mandates that officers exhaust all reasonably available alternatives before using deadly force. This includes de-escalation techniques, issuing verbal warnings, repositioning, calling for backup, or using lower levels of force. Research shows that officers at agencies with stricter use-of-force policies kill fewer people and are less likely to be killed or seriously injured themselves.
California's new law also specifically limits the use of deadly force against people who are fleeing from the police. It states that deadly force is only permitted if the fleeing person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another person if they are not apprehended. This provision emphasizes the necessity of avoiding deadly force whenever possible and ensuring that taking a life is truly a last resort.
While the new law provides clearer guidelines, the training of officers on its implementation has been inconsistent. Only 12% of California officers have completed the two-hour, state-certified course on the new deadly force law, which is not mandatory. This highlights the need for more comprehensive training and education to ensure that officers are well-versed in the updated standards and requirements regarding the use of deadly force.
Martial Law: Can the Bill of Rights Survive?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The law also limits force against people fleeing
California has the highest rate of officer-involved shootings in the nation. In 2017, police shot and killed 162 people in California, with only half of them armed with guns. The state's police departments have some of the highest rates of killings in the country.
In 2019, a proposed bill, AB 931, asked the legislature to change the restriction on the use of deadly force from when it is "'reasonable' to when it is "'necessary'. The bill would have limited the use of deadly force by a peace officer to situations where it is necessary to prevent imminent and serious bodily injury or death to the officer or a third party. It would also prohibit the use of deadly force by a peace officer if an individual poses a risk only to themselves.
In 2023, the ACLU of California affiliates supported a new bill, AB 392, to address police violence by updating California's deadly use-of-force law. The bill clarifies that police officers can use deadly force only when there are no alternatives that would prevent death or serious bodily injury. The legislation also requires officers to use de-escalation whenever possible and mandates that they exhaust all reasonably available alternatives before using deadly force.
Under the new law, deadly force is justified only when an officer is defending against an imminent threat of death or serious injury. The law also limits the use of deadly force against people who are fleeing from the police, stating that it is only allowed if the fleeing person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another person if they are not apprehended.
Despite the new law, training of officers has been inconsistent, with only 12% of California officers completing the two-hour, state-certified course on the new deadly force law as of March 2022.
Equality Under Canadian Law: Are Men and Women Equal?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![California Labor Code [2025 Edition]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51wmxjo9gzL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
Officers can still be charged for unnecessary use of force
California's existing law authorises peace officers to use reasonable force to effect an arrest, prevent escape, or overcome resistance. The use of deadly force is justified when it is necessary to overcome actual resistance to an arrest, apprehend a felon who has escaped custody, or arrest a person charged with a felony who is resisting or fleeing from justice.
However, officers can still be charged for unnecessary use of force. Police misconduct refers to incidents where an officer's actions are deemed outside the code of conduct. Excessive use of force is grounds for misconduct, and an officer may be disciplined or face criminal charges. Even in cases where police use of force is considered legally justified, civilian deaths and injuries remain a concern, especially those of unarmed individuals.
In California, from 2007 to 2016, there were 2,075 civilian fatalities during police encounters, with officers arrested in 0.72% of these cases. When focusing on deaths of unarmed civilians, arrests occurred in about 1.2% of incidents. While most cases of use of force are considered legally and procedurally justified, officers can face criminal charges if they kill unnecessarily.
To address concerns about police violence, California introduced the AB 392 bill, modelled after best practices already in place in some U.S. departments. The bill clarifies that police officers can use deadly force only when there are no alternatives to prevent death or serious bodily injury. It also mandates that officers use de-escalation whenever possible and exhaust all reasonably available alternatives before resorting to deadly force.
Additionally, California's Senate Bill 1421 expands access to police records related to use-of-force incidents and misconduct through public record requests, providing more transparency and accountability. Individuals can also seek legal recourse by filing civil rights lawsuits in state or federal court, seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 for violations of their Fourth Amendment rights.
Sponsorship to Canada: Father-in-Law as a Sponsor
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
California's Castle Doctrine allows the use of deadly force against an intruder who breaks into your home.
California courts adopted the Garner standard, which states that a police officer's use of deadly force is reasonable if there is probable cause to believe that a suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to an officer or others.
California's new standard for the use of deadly force states that deadly force is justified only when an officer is defending against an imminent threat of death or serious injury. This new standard also specifically limits the use of deadly force against people who are fleeing from the police.
AB 392, or The California Act to Save Lives, is a bill that clarifies that police officers can use deadly force only when there are no alternatives that would prevent death or serious bodily injury.
AB 931 is a proposed bill in California that asks the legislature to change the current restriction on the use of deadly force from when it is "reasonable" to when it is "necessary".
![A Disturbance in the Force [Blu-Ray]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61q8cD7hh8L._AC_UY218_.jpg)
