The tragic death of a Koreatown man shot by police during a mental health crisis continues to fuel a community-wide debate over how Los Angeles law enforcement handles vulnerable individuals, especially those allegedly armed with a sharp object. While the use of deadly force in the 2024 incident was ultimately deemed “justified,” the officer’s tactics have been formally criticized by the department’s oversight body, bringing the issue of police training and crisis response back into the spotlight.
The flashpoint occurred in May 2024, when Los Angeles Police Department officers responded to a crisis call at a Koreatown apartment. Forty-year-old Yong Yang, who struggled with bipolar disorder, was fatally shot inside his family’s home while reportedly holding a kitchen knife. The emotional pain of the case was compounded by the fact that Yang’s mother had initially reached out to the county’s Department of Mental Health for assistance, hoping to avoid involving police altogether.
The official review of the incident concluded this past April, making national headlines. The Police Commission, the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD, issued a split vote: it ruled that the officer involved was justified in using deadly force because he reasonably feared for his life when Yang advanced with the knife. However, in a unanimous decision that provided a significant policy critique, the Commission found that the officer’s actions and tactics leading up to the shooting violated department policy.
For the Yang family, who filed a lawsuit against the city, the complex ruling was little comfort, as their son remained one of a troubling number of individuals shot by the LAPD while experiencing a mental health crisis. The debate has only intensified since the commission’s ruling.
In October 2025, a performance audit released by the City Controller’s office delivered a harsh critique of the LAPD’s current mental health response strategy. The report highlighted an “inherent contradiction” in the department’s Systemwide Mental Assessment Response Team, or SMART, a program designed to pair officers with mental health clinicians. The audit found that LAPD policy still mandates armed patrol units to be the primary responders in crisis situations, forcing clinicians trained in de-escalation to defer to police.
This “patrol-first, armed approach,” as the report described it, came despite data showing a staggering statistic: from 2021 to 2024, anywhere from 35 percent to 41 percent of all LAPD shootings involved people in crisis. This figure underscores the high-stakes reality on the ground and the urgent need for systemic change.
Los Angeles County officials have been attempting to address this issue by expanding a parallel effort to reroute non-violent 911 calls directly to the 988 mental health crisis lifeline. This diversion program has shown success, with counselors handling a high percentage of calls without the need for police intervention. However, the deadly encounter in Koreatown is a stark reminder of the challenges police face when a crisis involves a perceived weapon, and the critical need for a response system that can de-escalate danger without escalating force.
As the family’s lawsuit proceeds and city officials review the new audit’s recommendations, the community waits to see if the reforms will finally bridge the gap between policy and practice, ensuring that a call for help does not become a death sentence.