San Francisco Moves to Limit When Security Guards Can Draw Firearms

San Francisco’s public safety committee on Thursday unanimously agreed to update the city’s police code to prohibit armed security guards from drawing firearms to protect property.

The vote comes nearly five months after Banko Brown was shot and killed by a security guard at a Walgreens in San Francisco for allegedly stealing $14 worth of candy. The ordinance amending the police code now heads to the full board of supervisors for approval.

“We heard some of the pain from Banko’s family and the LGBTQ community, and we tried to find ways to honor Banko’s memory and prevent something like this in the future,” said Supervisor Dean Preston, who authored the ordinance. “This is unacceptable. I strongly believe that no one should have to die just because they are suspected of stealing.”

San Francisco’s police code currently prohibits private security guards from drawing a handgun except in response to a “specific threat to person and/or property.”

The ordinance supervisors moved forward on Thursday would remove any reference to property as an acceptable reason to use force, meaning that security guards could only use guns to protect a person if there is a clear threat.

The proposed changes would bring San Francisco’s laws in alignment with the state, which orders armed security guards to not draw weapons unless there is an imminent threat to human life.

It would also match security guards’ standards with the city’s sworn police officers, who similarly are directed to only draw weapons if there is a clear threat to a person’s life.

“This is about the use of deadly force. It makes no sense whatsoever that we would have a different standard that would be more permissive for property when sworn officers have more rigorous standards,” said Supervisor Matt Dorsey. “I’m happy to support this.”

Supervisor Catherine Stefani, who has long been an advocate for gun violence prevention, called the ordinance an “important step.”

“The way the city regulates private security is absolutely critical,” Stefani said. “I’m concerned about the lack of oversight for some of these private security guards.”

Private security guards outnumber sworn police officers by nearly five-to-one in San Francisco, according to Stefani.

Under the Private Security Services Act, security guards in California are required to earn a permit for carrying a firearm. State law also requires armed security guards to watch about four hours of training videos — but those are mostly focused on weapons of mass destruction, rather than appropriate use of force or de-escalation.

California’s Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, which oversees security guard training, is currently developing new training programs.

Geoffrea Morris, attorney and co-founder of Black Women Revolt Against Domestic Violence, praised the city’s actions on Thursday. “Human lives should always be protected over property,” Morris said during public comment. “Justice for Banko Brown does not stop with this amendment.”

Other community members, however, shared hesitation over the amendment, citing concerns over retail theft and violence. Reported robberies in San Francisco in September 2023 are up nearly 12% compared to this time last year, according to police data.

“I completely agree with the sentiment behind this, but I think we need to look at why this is happening,” said a San Francisco resident named Adam during public comment. “We don’t have the police force interested in protecting stores, the people, etc. And maybe there is another answer for that. Maybe we get non-police resources. But the fact of the matter is that we don’t have that.”

Several supervisors expressed how the ordinance to amend the police code is only a start to addressing some of the challenges over public safety and armed security guards in the city.

Supervisor Joel Engardio, who co-sponsored the legislation, questioned whether it made sense for private security to have firearms and what degree of training people in those roles must complete.

“We have these regulations that are often out of step with state law,” Supervisor Preston said. “We felt some urgency to move on this narrow but important issue, but I think there is certainly more to be done.”