Rodney King was supposedly resisting arrest and continued to struggle even after being tazed, but are those actions enough to warrant the severe beating he received? The video recorded by George Holliday seemed to prove Rodney’s innocence but did not show what happened right before the incident occurred. To the jury, the video wasn’t enough to prove the officers guilty but to the public the decision not to indict the officers was followed by massive riots that took over the city. These riots lasted 6 days and only ceased when the national guard stepped in to stop the violence. In Tyre King’s case, the officer had to respond quickly in order to determine whether or not this person was a threat. Using his better judgement, he shot the boy for pulling a weapon on him even though it turned out to be nothing more than a BB gun (Lawrence, 2000). Was this officer justified in his actions? Police officers are trained to use lethal force only when absolutely necessary, so when an individual pulls a weapon on an officer whether real or fake the officer does not have time to hesitate. Hesitation in an officers eyes can mean the difference between going home to see their family at night, or having their family watch them be buried the next day (Reiss, …show more content…
The cases of Rodney King and Tyre King help us identify what was done wrong and whether or not what did happen was justifiable, but they both caused massive outrage throughout the United States that raised concerns regarding the connection between race and police brutality. The question of what constitutes as a lethal threat is also very controversial and isn’t always accepted by the public, but there are alternatives such as OC spray and tasers that may be used as a non lethal substitute when needed; however, they are not always as effective as we’d like them to be. Finally, in order to keep history from repeating itself; we have to understand what caused these situations and what we can do to make sure they never happen