Does anyone have video of the Korean shop owners during the 1992 LA riots?

[jlbraun]

I heard they were up on the rooftops with rifles and white headbands. I'm interested in seeing it for myself. Does anyone know where I can find it?

 

[roscoe]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfmEjIJyDT8

fast forward to the 3 minute mark

I don't know about the white head bands. Are you thinking of "Tora Tora Tora"?

 

[Lonestar]

don't know about the white head bands. Are you thinking of "Tora Tora Tora"?

I wondered about that too. I wondered if it has any significance, or was it to keep sweat out of their eyes.

 

[MikeH]

Hachimaki(headband) are thin cotton towels or strips of cloth tied around the head. Originally worn as a charm against evil spirits in ancient times, they are worn today not so much for the practical purpose to catch the perspiration but rather for a mental stimulation purpose to express one's determination. For example you might see people wearing hachimaki in a walk-out for a wage hike or political demonstration in the streets. Also heavy physical labor and such strenuous activities as carrying portable shrine (mikoshi) at festivals have people wearing them. Some students wear hachimaki when they study to put themselves in the spirit.

http://www.jun-gifts.com/specialcollections/headbands/headbands.htm

 

[StiKiller]

i'm sorry, i'm korean, and this is one of the reasons i will be purchasing a rifle, and a handgun soon, i own a beauty supply store in an urban area in philadelphia, and i will not let anything like this happen, if i was in la when this was happening, it would have been target practice for me.

 

[jlbraun]

Thanks, I appreciate it!

 

[Rezin]

StiKiller, a shotgun is also a good choice!!!

 

[duckandcover]

I watched a documentary on the LA Riots yesterday. "The Final Report:LA Riots" on National Geographic Channel. According to their website, it will be re-aired first week of November.

You might also want to check your library for a copy of "Sa-i-gu". My library here at the University of Texas has it and the focus on the Korean-American perspective is very powerful.

TITLE:
Sa-i-gu
PUBLISHED:
San Francisco, CA : CrossCurrent Media ; National Asian American Telecommunications Association, 1993.
DESCRIPTION:
1 videocassette (39 min.) : sd., col. ; 1993.
SERIES:
Ethnic studies video collection
NOTES:
In Korean with English subtitles.
Credits: Producers, Christine Choy, Elaine Kim, Dai Sil Kim-Gibson ; writer/director, Dai Sil Kim-Gibson ; co-director, Christine Choy ; editor, Richard Stilwell ; camera, Christine Choy.
Summary: Explores the embittering effect the Rodney King verdict and riot had on Korean American women shopkeepers who suffered more than half of the material losses in the conflict. Film underscores the shattering of the American dream while taking the media to task for playing up the "Korean-Black" aspect of the rioting.
VHS.

 

[Run&Shoot]

Koreans rock!

I really like those Korean shop owners. We had a Korean store owner as a neigbor at our previous house and that guy worked HARD. I can understand after working that hard they were not about to let looters just saunter in and run off with their livelihood. What a great example of creating the American dream, and then standing up to protect it from riff raff.

A worked with a former LRRP from Vietnam times and he patrolled with ROKs across the DMZ. They would run the flanks for the American patrol team. He said nothing, absolutely NOTHING ever got through their flanks. He said the ROKs were totally fearless and couragegous and would never back down no matter the odds. If a ROk was out there there he never worried about being surprised or infiltrated.

Nice to see a minority group buy into the WHOLE American experience, economic as well as self defense.

 

[StiKiller]

thanks duckandcover, i'll look into that~ Even though I was born here in the U.S, I still have my roots in Korea, and I am Korean after all, I love how we all get a chance to live our dreams in America, I feel bad for those in countries such as China and North Korea, just sad.

 

[epijunkie67]

Rezin
StiKiller, a shotgun is also a good choice!!!

I would tend to disagree. In this case the expected targets are people on the street who may be mixed with non-looters. A shotgun can be a bit indiscriminent about its field of fire and I'd hate for a noncombatent to get hit. I guess the other possibility would be to use birdshot as a deterent but that tends to raise a different set of issues.

Really, now that I think about it there doesn't seem to be any good answers to this problem. A real rifle like a 30-30 or .308 is going to be more power than you'd really want given the mix of targets and the environment. Overpenetration or a miss endangers a lot of people. Shotguns with buckshot would throw a wide pattern at distance and with slugs we're back to the rifle problem. Pistol caliber carbines would seem to be somewhat safer but lack the stopping power you'd want in a potentially deadly situation.

I also wonder about after action legal concerns. Say a group of looters gets too close to a store and the owner opens fire. A looter dies and a few get injured but live. Order is restored the next day. Now what? I'm the kind of guy that thinks a lot of criminals deserve whatever they get but I'm not the guy writting the laws. Legally you'd have a guy waving a gun around outside his store and shooting people on the street. The looters of course are going to claim they never touched the store owner, and in fact they didn't.

Whichever way it went it court it'd be a freaking nightmare for the shooter. And for what? They protected their stuff. A large percentage of people frown on deadly force simply for the protection of property. And don't tell me they were protecting themselves. They were camped out in front of their store protecting their property. If they'd stayed home when the looting started they would have been perfectly safe and never had to fire on anyone. They might have lost thousands of dollars in stuff but in the end, it's just stuff.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying to just let the criminals have anything they want but I'm also pointing out that firing on another human being can have some pretty heavy consequences. You might want to really consider all of them before you decide to kill someone just to protect your stuff.

 

[Oleg Volk]

Firing would have been done to protect lives from mob violence and arson. One person could reason with the mob, others would cover with rifles. Any firing would be done to protect the negotiator.

 

[Cosmoline]

I've lived in the Korean dominanted parts of Anchorage off and on for many years. I currently have a smiling, happy Korean landlord who without hesitation put six slugs into a would-be robber a few years ago. The attacks in LA are well known by the Korean communities across the nation, and believe me they're prepared. They ALL have heat, both the small stuff by the cash register and the other stuff kept sealed up just in case. If the SHTF, find the Koreans.

A real rifle like a 30-30 or .308 is going to be more power than you'd really want given the mix of targets and the environment.

Maybe more power than YOU would really want. An angry mob coming after my broad behind is going to get a dose of every thing I can possibly throw at it, from 54R SP's to IED's made from propane cans and gasoline. The LA looters weren't recovering from some natural disaster, they were a murderous mob totally out of control. When you face something like that and you can't get them to back off nicely, you have to be prepared to unleash whatever hell you can. I guaran-damn-tee you every Korean you see in those pictures trying to use a handgun to protect himself wished he had a really big battle rifle. And I know some of them who do--now.

 

[statelineblues]

Spent a year in South Korea while in the Army - treat these people with respect and honesty, and they are the greatest ; treat them badly and you get what you deserve !

 

[Redneck with a 40]

And what rifle did those Korean shop owners use to protect their stores?......The good o'le SKS!

 

[Leanwolf]

EPIJUNKIE67 - "Pistol caliber carbines would seem to be somewhat safer but lack the stopping power you'd want in a potentially deadly situation."


You're kidding??

A .44 Magnum, .45 Colt, .41 Magnum, or .357 Magnum from a rifle/carbine, poking some miscreant in the chest or head, would lack "stopping power"???

I'd sure hate to be on the receiving end of a bullet from a rifle/carbine, in any one of those calibers.

JMHO.

L.W.

 

[10 Ring Tao]

About a year ago I asked for these kinds of videos and no one was able to produce. Thank you!

 

[epijunkie67]

Leanwolf
You're kidding??

A .44 Magnum, .45 Colt, .41 Magnum, or .357 Magnum from a rifle/carbine, poking some miscreant in the chest or head, would lack "stopping power"???

Not really. I was thinking more along the lines of the 9mm and .40 cal carbines I see people buying. I've got levers in 3 of the four calibers you mention and I think they would work fine for self defense.

Oleg Volk
Firing would have been done to protect lives from mob violence and arson. One person could reason with the mob, others would cover with rifles. Any firing would be done to protect the negotiator.

Ah, but if the store owners had all stayed home, and away from the danger zone, there wouldn't be a need to protect anybody. It's like many of the threads we get here on THR that follow the "What if you know you're going to a dangerous area of town and will need a gun...", the most frequent response is "I wouldn't go there." If you have the option of avoiding a possible deadly force situation you better have a really good reason for going there anyway.

You and I are walking down the street and are both carrying concealed when we notice a group of 4 guys breaking into my car and stealing the stereo. We can either (A) Call the police on our cell phones and observe from a distance possibly allowing them to make off with my property but preserving the lives of everyone involved or (B) Approach them and demand they stop. I'll negotiate and if they rush us you open fire on them and hope they don't get us in the rush. Even if option B is legal it still amounts to the fact that we got involved in a deadly conflict over a piece of property when we could have chosen a course of action that allowed ALL of us to escape unharmed.

Cosmoline
Maybe more power than YOU would really want. An angry mob coming after my broad behind is going to get a dose of every thing I can possibly throw at it...

I agree. If I'm going to be in a firefight I want overwhelming power on my side. Give me a freaking flamethrower with a side order of full auto overlapping fields of fire. But, what do you do when there are nonlooters in the background? Are you prepared to unleash hell on a half dozen looters in the middle of the street knowing that there are innocent nonlooters standing 30 feet behind them? I know the looters were "out of control" but we aren't talking about firing on enemy solders in heavy jungle terrain. We're talking about firing a .308 battle rifle in a heavely urban city environment where a miss might kill an innocent person several hundred yards away.

Again, don't get me wrong. I think the people that looted were scum and deserve anything they get. But I'm trying to look at the broader picture. Not everybody in the city, or even in those particular neighborhoods, were looters. We're talking about projecting force in a volitile situation where there are a lot of innocent people that WE might injure or kill by accident. And it would be injuries or deaths that could be avoided by not being there in the first place. We always preach that deadly force is for protecting lives, not protecting possesions.

I'm just wondering why you would place yourself in a position you know could result in a deadly force encounter when you have the option of avoiding it and what you could do to minimize the risk to innocent civilians if you were required to use deadly force against the crowd?

 

[DirtyBrad]

Good to see honest people protecting themselves. Man, looters and mobs really make me sick. I pray non of us ever have to experience any of that.

The beginning made me roll my eyes. Rodney King wasn't exactly pulled over for a "routine traffic stop".

 

[DRZinn]

We can either (A) Call the police on our cell phones and observe from a distance possibly allowing them to make off with my property but preserving the lives of everyone involved or (B) Approach them and demand they stop. I'll negotiate and if they rush us you open fire on them and hope they don't get us in the rush. Even if option B is legal it still amounts to the fact that we got involved in a deadly conflict over a piece of property when we could have chosen a course of action that allowed ALL of us to escape unharmed.

They, by actions they chose, have put themselves in a situation wherein they will be confronted by an armed man. If it ends poorly for them, that's not my problem. I am not obligated to let them walk away with my property.

I'm just wondering why you would place yourself in a position you know could result in a deadly force encounter when you have the option of avoiding it

The value of the life of a looter approaches zero to me. If I were a store owner, the store and its contents would be far more valuable.

 

[StiKiller]

The value of the life of a looter approaches zero to me. If I were a store owner, the store and its contents would be far more valuable

AMEN to that !!!!

 

[DerringerUser]

I would've organized a small malitia, armed with shotguns, handguns, and semi autos, such as SKS or AR 10s. You are much more effective in a group, and it is easier to fight off a mob. I dont live in a big city, so hopefully i wont have to worry about that.

Again, don't get me wrong. I think the people that looted were scum and deserve anything they get. But I'm trying to look at the broader picture. Not everybody in the city, or even in those particular neighborhoods, were looters. We're talking about projecting force in a volitile situation where there are a lot of innocent people that WE might injure or kill by accident. And it would be injuries or deaths that could be avoided by not being there in the first place. We always preach that deadly force is for protecting lives, not protecting possesions.

Thats why i would choose semi autos over autos in this situation. You can take a large mob, but its more accurate, and less of a danger to bystanders.

I would also have some pellet guns, rubber bullets, or other less lethal guns and ammunition to disperse bystanders or a mob walking by.

 

[Lonestar]

i'm sorry, i'm korean, and this is one of the reasons i will be purchasing a rifle, and a handgun soon, i own a beauty supply store in an urban area in philadelphia, and i will not let anything like this happen, if i was in la when this was happening, it would have been target practice for me.

StiKiller, I'm originally from South Philly, if your store is anywhere in West Philly, North Philly, Grays Ferry or near South Street (Nice neighborhood, but lots of riots break out there, almost yearly) you need a firearm. Actually I would not take my chances in any part of a large urban city, but those places I mentioned had a riot within the last 50 years or has the potential.

 

[geekWithA.45]

Just skimmed the video Roscoe linked.

Interesting, the difference a choice of words can make.

The video maker decided to label that section (approx quote)

"Realizing that most of the violence was targetting them, the Korean community reacted with violence."

which paints a very different picture, than, oh, say "Realizing they were under attack, the Korean community defended itself".

 

[30 cal slob]

this thlead is making me RMAO.

you know, koleans ale stubboln hald-dlinking bastards, the ilish of the east they say.

the wolst of them ale the crass III koleans. they'rr have sevelar pistors, supplessed smg's, battre lifres AND shotguns and pires of ammo at the leady.

-srob, a crass III kolean