This article outlines the legal framework for drawing or using a firearm in self-defense under California and federal law, focusing on verified statutes and case law. For legal advice, contact The Davis Law Firm, experienced in California firearms law.
California law permits the use of firearms in self-defense under strict conditions, governed by the California Penal Code and the Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (CALCRIM). The state recognizes the “Stand Your Ground” principle (no duty to retreat) and the “Castle Doctrine” for home defense. Self-defense requires:
CALCRIM No. 3470 allows firearm use if the defendant reasonably believes they or another are in imminent danger of bodily injury and that immediate force is necessary. The force must be proportionate. See Judicial Council of Cal. Crim. Jury Instr. No. 3470 (2024).
Example: Lisa is walking in a park when an assailant grabs her arm and pulls a knife, threatening to stab her. Lisa, with a valid concealed carry permit, draws her handgun and shoots the assailant as he lunges. Her actions are likely justified under CALCRIM No. 3470, as she reasonably believed she faced imminent great bodily injury, and deadly force was necessary. See People v. Humphrey, 13 Cal. 4th 1073, 1082–83 (1996) (affirming reasonable belief standard for self-defense).
California Penal Code § 198.5 presumes that a person using deadly force in their residence against an unlawful intruder reasonably fears imminent death or great bodily injury. The intruder must enter unlawfully and forcibly, and the resident must not have provoked the intrusion. See Cal. Penal Code § 198.5.
Example: Mark hears his front door being kicked in at night. Arming himself with a legally owned shotgun, he confronts an intruder holding a tire iron. When the intruder raises the weapon, Mark shoots. His actions are presumed reasonable under § 198.5, as the intruder forcibly entered, and Mark reasonably feared harm. See People v. Curtis, 30 Cal. App. 4th 1337, 1362 (1994) (upholding Castle Doctrine application).
Under California Penal Code § 197(2), deadly force may be used to resist a violent felony, such as robbery or burglary, that threatens life or safety, but not to protect property alone unless there is a personal threat. See Cal. Penal Code § 197(2).
Example: Anna sees a thief breaking into her garage. When she confronts him, he pulls a gun and aims at her. Anna shoots him with her legally carried pistol. Her actions are justified under § 197(2), as the thief’s actions created a reasonable fear of death, not merely a property crime. See People v. Ceballos, 12 Cal. 3d 470, 478–79 (1974) (clarifying deadly force limits for property defense).
California Penal Code § 417 prohibits exhibiting a firearm in a rude, angry, or threatening manner unless done in self-defense. The defendant must reasonably believe they face imminent danger, and brandishing must be necessary. See Cal. Penal Code § 417(a)(2) (West 2025).
Example: James is at a store when a man threatens him with a bat, raising it to strike. James, with a concealed carry permit, draws his handgun and orders the man to stop. The man flees. James’s action is likely lawful under § 417(a)(2), as he reasonably believed he was in danger and used the firearm to deter the threat. See People v. Toledo, 26 Cal. App. 5th 426, 435 (2018) (discussing lawful brandishing in self-defense).
Federal law governs firearm possession and use through statutes like 18 U.S.C. § 922 and the Second Amendment, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Self-defense is a common law principle, but its application is limited by federal restrictions. See District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 635 (2008) (affirming right to self-defense in the home).
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), prohibited persons (e.g., felons) cannot possess firearms. However, a necessity defense may apply if possession is temporary, solely to prevent imminent harm, and the firearm is relinquished immediately after. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
Example: Sarah, a felon, is attacked in her home by an armed intruder. She disarms him and holds his gun until police arrive, then surrenders it. Her temporary possession is likely excused, as it was necessary to protect her life. See United States v. Deleveaux, 205 F.3d 1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2000) (recognizing necessity defense for § 922(g)).
In federal jurisdictions (e.g., national parks), self-defense permits deadly force only when there is a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily harm, and the force is proportionate. State law often applies in these areas, but federal restrictions may limit firearm carry. See 36 C.F.R. § 2.4 (2025) (allowing firearms in national parks per state law).
Example: Tom, hiking in a California national park, is charged by a mountain lion. He shoots it with his legally carried handgun. His actions are likely justified, as he faced an imminent threat of death, and California law permits shooting animals in self-defense. See Cal. Penal Code § 197(4); United States v. Wallen, 874 F.3d 620, 626 (9th Cir. 2017) (discussing reasonableness in self-defense).
Proving self-defense requires strong evidence, such as witness statements, physical evidence (e.g., injuries), or 911 recordings. Investigations often follow firearm use, even if justified. For legal representation, contact The Davis Law Firm, skilled in defending firearms-related cases.
As of May 22, 2025, California’s Assembly Bill 1333, which sought to impose a duty to retreat, has not been enacted and remains under debate. See Cal. Assemb. B. 1333 (2025) (introduced, not passed).
California and federal laws permit drawing or using a firearm in self-defense when there is a reasonable belief of imminent danger, the force is necessary, and the response is proportionate. California’s Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground principles provide strong protections, while both California and federal law allow limited exceptions for prohibited possessors. Evidence and context are critical, and The Davis Law Firm can provide expert guidance.
Note: This article is informational and not legal advice. For specific cases, consult The Davis Law Firm.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.