I remember early 1990s Los Angeles well.
Rodney King was a criminal and druggie who was speeding and then attacked police officers. after his dangerous speeding drive finally ended. While the famous video looks bad, a jury in a state/county criminal trial found that the arresting officers did not violate the law (actually, they were split on one charge against one of the four officers). Having followed the trial closely, I didn't disagree with their verdicts. I do not believe the jury was racist. If there was a bias in the jury, it was probably a "pro police" bias.
You can disagree with me on that, and still agree with me on everything below.
Opportunists and murderous criminals subsequently rioted, doing far worse to innocent people than the officers ever did to King.
Under the guise of such things as "Rebuild LA" the response was to REWARD the neighborhoods where these rioters were raised and encouraged and defended with taxpayer money and money from businesses. Businesses can do whatever they want with their money; if I'm an investor I can object or pull out my money. If I'm an employee I can quit. If I'm a customer I can stop being one. Taxpayer money is another story. Large companies offered jobs to young people living in these neighborhoods, giving them preference over kids from neighborhoods that weren't full of rioters, making accommodations they'd never make for anyone else.
The way I see it, after riots, I'm willing to support residents and businesses seeking to relocate and rebuild elsewhere; the last thing I want is to reward rioters.
After the riots, the feds came in and did a "civil rights" trial against the police officers. Two of the four were subsequently convicted, and of course the jury couldn't possibly have had in their minds "We'd better convict or the city will burn," right???
I'm not aware of any of the convicted former officers subsequently beating up any people, regardless of skin color. But Rodney King kept committing crimes and being a danger to others, generally wasting his life and his sizable settlement check, and died relatively young. His autopsy results indicated he died from accidental drowning, and that a combination of alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, and PCP found in his system were contributing factors.
The officers who arrested him in the famous incident had said they suspected he was on PCP, based on his behavior (including being able to fight off the officers), so it was interesting that all those years later (and after rehab programs) it was still found in his system.
We're fortunate King didn't do more harm than he did. He easily could have killed people with his behavior.
There are still blighted areas in the rioter neighborhoods 25 years later. Of course there is! Even with incentives from misguided government, why would people rebuild a business or move their business in to a place where people burn businesses down, steal, assault, and murder?
Rodney King was a criminal and druggie who was speeding and then attacked police officers. after his dangerous speeding drive finally ended. While the famous video looks bad, a jury in a state/county criminal trial found that the arresting officers did not violate the law (actually, they were split on one charge against one of the four officers). Having followed the trial closely, I didn't disagree with their verdicts. I do not believe the jury was racist. If there was a bias in the jury, it was probably a "pro police" bias.
You can disagree with me on that, and still agree with me on everything below.
Opportunists and murderous criminals subsequently rioted, doing far worse to innocent people than the officers ever did to King.
Under the guise of such things as "Rebuild LA" the response was to REWARD the neighborhoods where these rioters were raised and encouraged and defended with taxpayer money and money from businesses. Businesses can do whatever they want with their money; if I'm an investor I can object or pull out my money. If I'm an employee I can quit. If I'm a customer I can stop being one. Taxpayer money is another story. Large companies offered jobs to young people living in these neighborhoods, giving them preference over kids from neighborhoods that weren't full of rioters, making accommodations they'd never make for anyone else.
The way I see it, after riots, I'm willing to support residents and businesses seeking to relocate and rebuild elsewhere; the last thing I want is to reward rioters.
After the riots, the feds came in and did a "civil rights" trial against the police officers. Two of the four were subsequently convicted, and of course the jury couldn't possibly have had in their minds "We'd better convict or the city will burn," right???
I'm not aware of any of the convicted former officers subsequently beating up any people, regardless of skin color. But Rodney King kept committing crimes and being a danger to others, generally wasting his life and his sizable settlement check, and died relatively young. His autopsy results indicated he died from accidental drowning, and that a combination of alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, and PCP found in his system were contributing factors.
The officers who arrested him in the famous incident had said they suspected he was on PCP, based on his behavior (including being able to fight off the officers), so it was interesting that all those years later (and after rehab programs) it was still found in his system.
We're fortunate King didn't do more harm than he did. He easily could have killed people with his behavior.
There are still blighted areas in the rioter neighborhoods 25 years later. Of course there is! Even with incentives from misguided government, why would people rebuild a business or move their business in to a place where people burn businesses down, steal, assault, and murder?