The Boston Massacre: The Incident On King Street

On March 5, 1770, three men died of gunshot wounds and two others died from their injuries. The events leading to their deaths are crucial to understand. Great Britain had stationed soldiers in Boston to enforce laws and defend protests. The colonists were resisting the British laws because Britain had been enforcing taxes created by the British Parliament in which the Colonies had no representation. Tension between the colonists and soldiers erupted on the night of March 5.

The evidence, from the 7 eyewitnesses, support that the colonists were the aggressors during the fateful evening of March 5, 1770, the Boston Massacre. Some cited evidence proves it. Number one, “I saw the people throw snowballs at the soldiers and saw a stick 3 feet long strike a soldier upon the right” (Theodore Bliss). In other terms they were assaulting the soldiers with pieces of snow or ice at them, afterward they hit one of them with a 3 foot club. This shows that the soldiers didn’t shoot to murder, they shot in self-defense.

The soldiers got scared and fired into the crowd hitting 11 people and killing 5. (Document 6) This event became an inspiration for propaganda against the Redcoats,British soldiers, like Paul Revere’s print of the event. Propaganda is misleading information to persuade others point of view and it did exactly that. Paul Revere’s print referred to this as the Boston Massacre, a massacre being a brutal killing of a bunch of people.

They shouted, “No taxation without Representation!” The Boston Massacre and The Boston Tea Party angered the colonists and the king. This caused trouble between the Patriots and the British which led to the American Revolution. To start with, The Boston Massacre was just

Was the Boston Massacre Really a Massacre? One of the most common things talked about in the history of the U.S.A. is the Boston Massacre, but was this historical event commonly looked at as a massacre really a massacre. I believe that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre at all instead it was just the act of self defense of a few british soldiers that were being attacked by upset colonists. One of the most said things about the Boston Massacre is that the british soldiers fired into a crowd of innocent people, but there is many pieces of proof that says otherwise.

It is safe to say that both sides instigated this massacre. The Boston Massacre was justified self defense but the soldiers did not need to take it to the degree they did. Maybe arresting a few of them or firing in the air could have settled the crowd enough to take control, but I am certain the soldiers felt their lives were in danger and fear took control of them. The riot was made to kill or severely hurt some of the soldiers, the reason for the riot being there was not justified.

Although there are many historians that go back and forth between believing that the Boston Massacre was murder or self defense. But it is clear that is was an act of murder on the part of the Red-Coat soldiers. There were many pieces of evidence leaning onto the side of murder, the first one being that every murder has a motive right? This motive involved a colonist named Samuel Gray and a soldier named Killroy. A day before the massacre happened, Killroy and Samuel got in a fight in Samuels shop.

Due to the impartial view of the British and the desire of the colonists to remove the British the massacre was the perfect event to propagandize, resulting in war and restoration of power with the upper class. The issue of perspective as it pertains to the Boston Massacre is the key point to consider how an individual should view it. The name of the event even gives it an inflated nature calling it a “massacre” when only five people died. While the soldiers were declared guilty, consideration must be given to the fact that they were tried in Boston.

The Boston Massacre was influenced by the British soldiers first shooting the colonists. Due to the commands of Captain Preston, the soldiers were forced to engage in fighting, said by William Wyatt. In his account, the British were ordered around by Captain Preston and were not in the usual formation for a battle. From other perspectives, like George Sanderlin and Andrew, they had heard the captain boom, “Fire! Be the consequences at will.”

There were many disagreements and because of those, many events were the cause of the American Revolution. These events included bloodshed by others, peoples rights weren’t enforced, individuals didn’t receive freedom, and our country was just not yet whole. Despite of the causes of why the road to Revolution took place there were effects afterwards. When American Revolution was over with the The Declaration of Independence came into place, treaties were signed, and the Bill of Rights. Now these effects/events were amazing, it helped our country tremendously.

On the night of March 5, 1770, A major conflict between the American Colonists and British soldiers arose on King street. The British were taxing the Colonists, and the Colonists were protesting and boycotting against the taxes creating tension between the two sides. Since this happened, the British soldiers are the ones to blame for the Boston Massacre. The British Soldiers are responsible for the Boston Massacre According to the Committee of Boston, (Sam Adams, John Hancock and more…) “ This is without warning of their intention and killed 3 on the spot.”

Which resulted in much propaganda, such as Paul Reevers paints. In his paintings he only shows the soldiers firing at the colonists, and does not include the colonists throwing clubs or snowballs. Paul Revere also over exaggerated the wounds of the colonists to make the battle appear more gruesome, also, he left out wounds that the soldiers received from the colonists. Therefore creating propaganda, and over exaggeration the event to convince that the Boston Massacre was a

The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a “patriot”. They were throwing sticks, snowballs, and trash at a group of British troops. The loyalists got very annoyed with the patriots so they shot into the mob killing five. The riot began when around 50 colonists attacked a British sentinel. A British officer called in for additional troops

I believe the incident in Boston was just a terrible tragedy. The incident was a tragedy because the soldiers wouldn't have opened fire if the 2 men hadn't stepped out of the bar and started throwing snowballs, making a bunch of unneeded noise causing lots of people to come out of their homes. Massacre means the killing of lots of people almost like it was on purpose, yet it is too big of a word for this situation because only 3 people died on the spot. It would’ve been a massacre if the soldiers opened fire right away on the 2 men and a lot of other people.

The definition of a massacre is a specific incident which involves the killing of people, although not necessarily a crime against humanity. The number of killed ranges from just a few people to many millions. Don’t let the name fool you, this massacre resulted in the death of five, a small number compared to other events. This fact did not prevent people from using this against the soldiers and create an even bigger stir of it. While colonists saw it as a brutal attack that was unprovoked and simply began by children joking around with soldiers and throwing snowballs, the British soldiers claimed that it was planned by the citizens who attacked them in a mob with clubs and snowballs packed so densely they were mounts of solid ice and provoked them to fire.