In the third month of 1991, police officers brutally a braised a black man while arresting him for over speeding (Harris, 2017) .However some nearby residents video tapped the ordeal . The video went viral and turned the whole situation to approve of police brutality. Moreover, everyone thought that they this proved their crime and that they will be charged. To their dismay, the nearly all white jury released three of the police officers pinning the blame on one. The judgment sparked rage surprise and riots throughout the African –American section of the city. On the other hand, the administration of the city responded by calling in National armed forces from California, some service men from the army and marine to cool down the six day demonstration. Consequently, at least fifty four people died, two thousand left injured and billions of dollars of property destroyed. Evidently, the response by the administration of Los Angeles was flawed.
Over View of the Response
The African-American enraged by the jury’s judgment on the motorist’s case rioted. The rioted started 45 minutes after the judgment when a rowdy crowd formed at the junction of Florence and Normandie avenues. Later, the police came after a call but instead of capacitating the crowd called for emergency support (Faragher, 2014). The National armed forces from California responded to the call and ordered for a deploy of two thousand troops to the streets of Los Angeles. The next day, the city was under curfew and no one was allowed on the streets (Lee, 2012). Furthermore, by two thirty of the same day, the administration of Los Angeles mobilized the armed forces from California together with Los Angeles police department on the streets. Due to the perpetuation of the unrest, the governor asked for two thousands more troops from California. However, they responded slowly so he decided to call for federal troops .The president agreed and four thousand troops were mobilized to Los Angeles. In the afternoon of May first, a convoy of marines arrived in Los Angeles. The troops deployed on the streets lead to the end of the riots. The results were deaths of many people, injuries and destruction of property.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Weakness of the Response
Firstly, the California police had the ability to stop the riots at the beginning but left only to call for emergency support (Harris, 2017). Moreover, the need of calling in the marine and troops from the army was absent. Furthermore the troops deployed on the streets had no specific mission. The different troops had different command rules. For instance when police officers together with the marines arrived in a door, the occupants fired two gun shots. One of the police shouted “cover me” to the marines who responded by shooting into the house which was not what the police meant (Harris, 2017).The command means shoot in marine. Typically, the deployment caused more damage than good.
Importance to the Understanding of Leadership
To begin with, the case shows us how a wrong move by a leader can spur unrest in the society. As a leader justice should always be forefront when making judgments. The jury, who stand for leaders in this context, should have judged fairly. Additionally, the court should have chosen a fair race jury. Similarly, leaders should always be proactive during crisis. For instance, if the Californian leadership was fast enough in deploying their troops they would have been need to deploy the soldiers (Gonzalez,2014). Furthermore, the case clearly depicts that as one should never be quick to civil wars using the armed forces. The results may be better if negotiations were called for or if the President addressed the people on the issues and listened to their grievances. Moreover, from the case we understand that it is not easy being a leader. The challenges and stressed the administration of California went through proves that leadership is not a bed of roses (Gonzalez, 2014). Likewise, from the case we can clearly see how racial discrimination can led to so much violence so as a leader one should always strive to maintain equality and equity. The leaders should always put the desires of their people at heart.
Difference between a Manager and a Leader
Firstly, leaders have dreams which the motivate people and work with them to turn them into reality while managers have objectives which they set and focus on achieving them through controlling situations around them. Additionally, leaders are usually propagators of change while managers change the states of events within their environment to achieve a set goal. Furthermore, leaders are exclusive and usually focus on being themselves (Gonzalez). On the other hand, managers imitate the expertise and approach of others to achieve their desired goal. To couple with that, leaders are never afraid of taking risks but rather embrace them. On the contrary, managers focus on minimizing risks and rarely try new things. Likewise, managers have short time aspirations which they seek accolades after achieving unlike leaders who work with the intention of impacting on the world which is long term. Finally, leaders work on developing personally while managers put more focus on professional development. Evidently, one should always strive to be a leader.
In conclusion, the judgment by the jury against the black man who has brutally handled by police led to a lot of riots because against what everyone expected. As a result, the people of Los Angeles demonstrated in the streets crying for the injustices. However, there administration called for emergency support that leads to deaths of many. Typically, the response was wrong.
References
Faragher, J. (2014). Rodney King tape on national news.
Gonzalez, J. (2014). Daily News New York .
Harris, P. (2017). Black Rage Confronts the Law. NYU Press.
Lee, C. (2012). Conflicts, Riots and Korean Americans in Los Angeles 1965-1992.
