What Did We Learn About The Boston Massacre

On March 16, 1968, the Mai Lai Massacre took place in a small village in Vietnam. More than five hundred people were murdered by soldiers under the control of William Calley. Afterward, throughout the entire town only three weapons were recovered from the villagers. In fact, other than that, they were not armed. One of the officers even claimed he did not see a single military aged man in the entire village.

Both sides agree on certain elements of the massacre, but yet they still have completely different interpretations on others, such as who actually gave the command to open fire. Where Wyatt and Preston both agree is rather limited in terms of the whole story. Both initially believed that that the bells that sounded while the riot was occurring meant there was a fire in the city and both learned around the same time that it was in fact a warning of a protest. They also agree that the crowd

In the early 1760’s, the tension between the people in Boston and the British soldiers started to grow until in early 1770, when the two groups reached their breaking point. On March 5, 1770, a group of men started intimidating a British soldier; he soon called for assistance but eventually the crowd had grown to practically one hundred people. Captain Thomas Preston and seven other soldiers arrived, trying to calm the situation down, but to no avail. A soldier fired into the crowd followed by the other soldiers firing soon after, resulting in five people being killed. Captain Thomas Preston happened to be arrested and charged with murder.

As a witness to The Boston Massacre as a Patriot as an English citizen, I believe that the British Soldiers are unstable to protect us if they will kill us. The acts that lead up to the killing of five patriots were downgrading us. After are Victory in the French and Indian War we became in debt. The British officials decided to make laws such as Writs of Assistance, Sugar Act, Quartering Act, Stamp Act and the Proclamation of 1763 and more were soon made. This just anger us so a boycott was made called The Sons of Liberty the leader was Samuel Adams.

The Boston Massacre, which passage includes more evidence and support towards facts about the Massacre? Passage number 2 provides more evidence and support than the first passage. This doesn’t mean that the first passage doesn’t do good, this just means that the passage number 2 does a better job at explaining the stuff. Both of the passages give reasonsings for what the Massacre is, but passage 2 has a better and more appropriate explanation. Usually people say quality over quantity, but even though Passage 2 is longer, it still is the most efficient passage to go along with the Boston Massacre.

On March 5, 1770, five people died at the hands of British soldiers in Boston, Massachusetts. Based on an analysis of the eyewitness testimonies, medical examiner’s reports, and the crime scene, it was determined that the soldiers did not commit murder, but rather acted in self-defense. Many eyewitness testimonies clearly describe the mob as threatening to the point where the soldiers felt they were in danger. Dr. John Jeffries, the surgeon attending to Patrick Carr, who died during the incident, states that Carr said the soldier who shot him “had no malice, but fired to defend himself.”

What Really Happened At The Boston Massacre? Over the course of centuries, disputes amongst people have been prevalent throughout American history. As a result of the human tendency to disagree with each other, outburst of wars, massacres, and riots often occurred. An example of this is Boston Massacre, in which took place over two centuries ago, on March fifth, 1770.

The boston massacre was somewhat of an accident given the fact that there were several reasons for the incident. The massacre was not all the britishes fault for an example the bostonians were hitting the british troops with sticks and throwing snowballs at them. The article states that the british are not to open fire on the bostonians, but they still open fired and killed five bostonians. Witnesses that were interviewed then say that youngsters were throwing snowballs but were doing no real harm to the soldiers and therefore they should not have shot fire.

The American Revolution was a time period where there were 13 colonies in America exploring more of the land everyday, The british shared the land with people who are called the pilgrims and ended up soon turning into Patriots and after that Americans. Great Britain started abusing their colonists while there were shootings and many taxes of colonists, many were unfair, and this led to the revolution. This war was between The Patriot/Americans against the British/Loyalists. The revolution happened because a few major events in history took place in Boston others will say it as British Territory.

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.

1. Boston Massacre a. The Boston Massacre took place on March 5, 1770 in Boston. The Boston Massacre became a historical event because it was the start of a revolution. It all began when the British soldiers came into Boston and fired shots at the colonists for making a crowd and going against the soldiers.

However, the colonists needed to rally more people on their side. They knew that the killing of five men was tragic, yes, but it is not a technical massacre. If truth got around that their was fighting on both sides, it would seem as just a

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.

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

The Boston Massacre is an event most Americans and British students learn about over the course of their education. In America, we learn that British soldiers fired upon innocent civilians, although this may not have been the case. British historians have referred to the Boston Massacre as the "Incident on King Street". After looking over the "Captain Thomas Preston 's Account of the Boston Massacre", as well as "Boston Massacre Trial Depositions" I believe that American historians should refer to the "Boston Massacre" as the "Incident on King Street". The definition of a massacre refers to an unnecessary and random killing of a large number of individuals.