Rodney King dead at 47

Post Reply New Topic

Rodney King dead at 47

Why can't we all just float along??

The pool boys will riot now. Guard your towels!

This is one of those moments where I find out what happened a long time ago through related recent events. Previously, I knew there had been riots, as I had discussed them with people before. However, it was only now that I found out more than fifty people were killed, thousands injured and half a city looted. The direct reason for the riots was rather stupid - the man was on parole for robbery, and was speeding under influence.

As with the London riots, it's romantically blamed on police brutality, racism and social inequality. However, instead of targeting police, the riots seem to have consisted mainly of people looting stores and assaulting people, leaving more than fifty people dead and thousands more injured while strategically avoiding police. This was not bravery, this was not a reaction to injustice - this was looting, rape and murder justified by police beating up a convicted criminal.

When looking at footage from these riots, it almost looked like it was a West African country having another bout of unrest.

The rioters were very angry that there was a perfect video of Rodney King being beaten within inches of his life by police officers. And then the jury disregarded it at the officers trial.

It probably happened all the time except somebody recorded that specific incident on tape, but the jury didn't care.

That's very young for someone to die whoever they are. Even if someone has committed a crime they shouldn't be beaten by the police in a civilised society. If you search for and watch the video of the beating you will see that this was not restraint (which is often necessary) but a vicious assault which is never acceptable. After watching the video it is almost unbelievable that those officers were acquitted and I can understand why people were very angry. Obviously, none of that is an excuse for rioting which is always wrong - but the reaction to what happened after the court case was not Mr Kings fault.

His very last words were: "Can't we all just get along?",

He exhausted about 25 percent of his vocabulary with that.

ruveyn

Nevertheless it was a very profound question.

There's a scene in The Matrix that looks just like the RK beating video -- 6 cops beating a man who is laying on the ground. I guess that imagery is iconic, now.

Some people go into law enforcement to protect and serve the public, and others to beat the sh** out of the public with impunity. When I saw the video I kept thinking, "hey guys, I think you got/caught him..." RK may have been a crook/petty criminal but he didn't deserve what he got.

There was a case I heard of recently where a 68 year old black man accidentally triggered his Life Alert pendant. The LA company dispatched police to his house to check on him. When the cops arrIved the man said through his door that he was ok, and that the alert was an accident. The cops then began swearing and using the n-word. Then they kicked in his door, tazered and shot him twice. He died.

The reason this is known is because the LA pendant recorded all of it. So maybe the cops won't be able to lie their way out of it. OTOH, what evidence a jury is allowed to see/hear remains to be seen. Given the RK verdict it seems quite possible that the cops will not be held responsible.

I agree with you for the most part, but in some ways, what the rioters and looters did, though not admirable by any means, was a larger scale version of what the police did in the first place. That's not to justify the destruction of Los Angeles at all.

What I'm saying is that the 'group think' mentality in which a shared emotion leads to violence/aggression/destruction is appalling in any form. What the rioters did was appalling, and there's no excuse for it, but don't give the cops a pass either. They did the same thing in beating King. He was subdued, their aggression was a manifestation of their shared sadism, romantically justified by the idea that "we're cops, he's the bad guy." He was subdued, it was time to arrest him, not continually beat him.

I remember the event well. I was a kid in school and we had to talk about it in social studies class, and it was all over the news. While I fully agree with you about the emotionally-charged senselessness of the LA Riots, and I'm not sympathizing with the looters at all, I think you should at least check out a few more sources if this was before your time. NOT for the purpose of agreeing with or justifying the actions of the looters, there's no excuse for that, but at least to understand WHY they were so appalled by the beating.

I'm amazed he lasted as long as he did.

He came out of the car combative (high on PCP), was shot with 2 tasers, yet he only dropped to one knee before lunging at a cop. He's lucky he wasn't shot.
The cops had to "soften him up" (outdated police slang) to subdue him.

King's toxicology results tested negative for PCP.

To "soften him up" is strange terminology for beating a man nearly to death while saying: "we are going to kill you n****r".

To be honest, I can understand the police's actions more than those of rioters. The policemen were confronted with yet another drunk guy speeding down the highway. He refused to stop, because he was on parole for robbery, and they had a chase through a residential area. Finally, after they had to send a helicopter his way, they managed to corner him. When he stepped out of the car, he acted like most drunk madmen would. When they tried to arrest him, he resisted, and he hit one of the policemen. He had, by the time they started beating him, resisted arrest twice, attacked a policeman, and he had initiated a dangerous chase while completely drunk.

The rioters, meanwhile, watched television and thought it would be a good idea to start lynching people, dragging people out of cars, raping people, killing people and looting stores until the situation was brought under control. Had it been ideological, about their aversion to police brutality, they could have tried to conquer police stations, but they'd have been shot dead with ease. This was opportunism - killing unarmed targets while outrunning armed ones.

I'm in no disagreement about the rioters.

What I was saying is that once King was subdued, it was time to stop beating him. It was not the responsibility of the police to determine his fate for his actions, that's what courts are theoretically for. Once they had accomplished their goal of subduing the perpetrator, it was time to take him into custody. Instead, they all went hogwild and beat him for thrills and/or retaliation, which is not the purpose of police (ideally).

Rodney King was no angel, but the riots that had been inspired by his beating, and the subsequent acquittal of the police who had beaten him, had released rage long repressed in the black community, due to the police presence that could be likened to an occupying army, with all the racial prejudice that comes with it. Then other poor people of different races took part in the riots day later, as the release of long suppressed anger spread.
That's not to justify the loss of life, physical assault, or destruction of property, but it is an explanation.

Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXRZMGHqA7E[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koAyLPUftHo[/youtube]

To understand the acquittal, you really need to watch the entire video, not just the edited part that was shown repeatedly on the news. It was still a bad incident, but the complete video gives it a bit more context and makes it clearer how a jury could arrive at an acquittal when the officers went on trial. IMHO if anyone should have been held accountable for both the beating and the subsequent riots, it was the LAPD leadership who ran the organization like a paramilitary force and didn't teach the officers how to do anything with their PR-24s other than hit people with them and tolerated years of abusive practices until they became ingrained in the culture of the force.