Amazon.com Widgets

Were the British justified to fire at colonists in the Boston Massacre?

  • The British were defending themselves

    It wasn't the soldier's fault for going to Boston to maintain the order around there. They did not come to detain the crowd. Plus, the crowd started throwing things at the British. If you were getting slapped around and hurt because you were in the presence of someone(s), would you stand and not do anything? In addition, the people called it a massacre when in truth, the people weren't shot at mercilessly. They were shot at In defense for the British.

  • The British were defending themselves

    It wasn't the soldier's fault for going to Boston to maintain the order around there. They did not come to detain the crowd. Plus, the crowd started throwing things at the British. If you were getting slapped around and hurt because you were in the presence of someone(s), would you stand and not do anything? In addition, the people called it a massacre when in truth, the people weren't shot at mercilessly. They were shot at In defense for the British.

  • British self defense

    They were being attacked. They were not going to stand back get attacked like any human being. No person is going to surrender when they are capable of reacting to save themselves. Just as in todays society people shoot back at others who are a threat to them such as in home invasions, robberies, etc.

  • They stood up for themselves

    The British were sticking up for themselves when they fired at the colonist. I think they were doing what we would do now, i know that if someone attacked me i would stick up for myself or fire at someone who would break into my house or jump me. You never know what to except back then or now.

  • They stood up for themselves

    The British were sticking up for themselves when they fired at the colonist. I think they were doing what we would do now, i know that if someone attacked me i would stick up for myself or fire at someone who would break into my house or jump me. You never know what to except back then or now.

  • Fight or Flight!

    Although it is difficult to know exactly what it would feel like to be afraid for my own life in a situation like this, I think that anything is fair game when it comes to feeling that your life is in imminent danger. I think attacking with weapons should only be used as a last resort and I don't like it, but if it came to defending my own life or that of my family/friends, I think I would have acted in a similar way.

  • The Soldiers were provoked

    The soldiers were harassed and provoked by the crowd. In defense, the soldiers attacked due to the activation of self defense. I don't believe that their actions were crude and bad. The crowd was throwing things at them like sticks, snowballs, and stones. The Britons did restrain themselves from doing anything for quite some time until they realized that the mob were starting to take things like the law and order into their hands due the Britons being at their city

  • Soldiers have a right to defend themselves.

    Today, if I was standing before a mob of angry Islamic people in their country, I would not be second guessed for how I chose to respond to an angry and attacking force. Outnumbered, the British soldiers exercised restraint towards the mob. When the soldiers were assaulted with snowballs, clubs, and other violence they did the only thing they could do in the hope of escaping with their lives. The soldiers used an escalation of force to scare the rest of the attackers away. Had the British not fired, it is safe to assume they would have been further molested or even killed by mob. Killing in self defense is righteous. Bear in mind that the colonists saw the weapons the soldiers had. They still pressed and provoked in spite of this and got exactly what they were asking for.

  • The massacre itself is deeply misleading

    Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "Massacre" as : "the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty"

    A mob several times the size of the soldiers actively throwing stones, sticks, and provoking the soldiers fails spectacularly to match this definition. Not a single person on the no side speaks favorably of the behavior of the Bostonians. Another definition talks of indiscriminate killing, while less men died than total muskets present.

    It was not a mob that formed because of the soldiers aggression, it was the soldiers who deployed in response to the mob's aggression toward a soldier. Nothing that happened that day was fast, and the soldiers ultimately displayed incredible restraint before pulling the trigger.

    When an arrest warrant was issued for the soldiers, they immediately turned themselves over to the sheriff, knowing that any objective jury would deliberate testimony and find their actions justified. Six were acquitted, two reduced charges to manslaughter after pleading benefit of clergy. The fact that jury decision was made with a anti-crown jury pool, speaks volumes.

  • Soldiers don't shoot for no reason...

    We're talking about a time period right before the revolutionary war, to paint the picture, imagine, Britain passing acts such as Townshend, Stamp and Sugar acts, that the colonists work to avoid. Britain is having problems controlling the colonies at this time. Taking that into consideration, why in the WORLD would ANY British officer allow or order their soldiers to fire into a crowd of unarmed people? Might as well throw the colonies away by doing that... The logic just doesn't line up. These are war veterans we are talking about, soldiers that have tons of training and experience, I think they could tolerate a few "snowballs" that most people pretend were the only things thrown or used...

    -I try to look at things in an unbiased way and form an opinion AFTER examening evidence.

  • Captain Preston said NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Captain Preston wouldn't say "don't shoot" if he didn't have any reason for it. Private Hugh Montgomery had no right in ordering his fellow soldiers to shoot, especially after Captain Preston ordered otherwise. The first thing you learn when you enter the army is "yes sir, no sir" Not, "I know better than you sir." Montgomery obviously had a problem controlling his temper issues, but that doesn't give him any right to shoot!

  • Their reaction was excessive.

    The colonists were behaving violently, and while the soldiers needed to protect themselves, but lethal force should not have been implemented. Most current state laws concerning self-defense allow no greater degree of force to be used than what is absolutely necessary to neutralize the threat. Yes, this means that you can't shoot someone for throwing a small rock at you. I believe, since this law applies to citizens, it's only fair that it applies to law enforcement and soldiers as well.

  • Unarmed People aren't deadly

    I say no because while the soldiers were afraid for their lives, the force was excessive. This sounds all too familiar to what happens with our law enforcement now and the killing of unarmed "threatening" individuals. Yes I understand they did have objects they intended to use as weapons, who wins if you bring a snowball to a gun fight?

  • They were defending themselves not trying to hurt anyone!!!

    They had to shoot. If they didn't, someone could have been killed. And did they have any other weapons than guns? No i don't think so. They didn't have knives or anything all they were doing was defending themselves. If someone was throwing rocks and snowballs at you would you just stand there? Probably not.

  • They were defending themselves not trying to hurt anyone!!!

    They had to shoot. If they didn't, someone could have been killed. And did they have any other weapons than guns? No i don't think so. They didn't have knives or anything all they were doing was defending themselves. If someone was throwing rocks and snowballs at you would you just stand there? Probably not.

  • They were defending themselves not trying to hurt anyone!!!

    They had to shoot. If they didn't, someone could have been killed. And did they have any other weapons than guns? No i don't think so. They didn't have knives or anything all they were doing was defending themselves. If someone was throwing rocks and snowballs at you would you just stand there? Probably not.

  • They were defending themselves not trying to hurt anyone!!!

    They had to shoot. If they didn't, someone could have been killed. And did they have any other weapons than guns? No i don't think so. They didn't have knives or anything all they were doing was defending themselves. If someone was throwing rocks and snowballs at you would you just stand there? Probably not.

  • If you're okay with this, are you okay with what goes on with our law enforcement and civilians ?

    Can you really say guns and bullets flying is equivalent to an unarmed person, a person throwing snow, or something that seems menacing (is not though) just because you felt threatening. Do you know how much discord would happen if we went only on our feelings alone, especially fear. ...

  • If you're okay with this, are you okay with what goes on with our law enforcement and civilians ?

    Can you really say guns and bullets flying is equivalent to an unarmed person, a person throwing snow, or something that seems menacing (is not though) just because you felt threatening. Do you know how much discord would happen if we went only on our feelings alone, especially fear. ...

  • Soldiers weren"t ordered to attack

    Some say that Captain Preston ordered them to fire. THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. Soldiers fired themselves even when Captain Preston said no. This wasn't the colonists fault, it was one of the soldiers who started the killing. Yes the colonists were acting violently but that was probably because they showed up with weapons and colonists may be afraid of what will happen. And colonists hit people with snowballs, stones, and clubs. Soldiers shouldn't kill the people for self defense! They could have just hurt them a little so they would stop!


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.