Avery Fitzgerald Mrs. Allard Social Studies Period 3 March 8, 2024.
Blood on King Street: The True Antagonists.
On March 5, 1770, a conflict occurred in Boston between the British soldiers stationed in the town, and the colonists living there. This strife ultimately ended in the deaths of multiple townspeople and even more being injured. Some may argue that the colonists were at fault because they instigated the situation, but when we look closer, it is clear that they were only acting in a form of self-defense. The British were the ones truly at fault for the events of the Boston Massacre. This is confirmed firstly because the British conducted serious physical offenses against the colonists. Secondly, because the British repeatedly imposed …show more content…
Firstly, the British soldiers committed serious and violent physical offenses against the colonists. According to the Boston Gazette, “the soldiers continued to fire successively till seven or eight or, as some say, eleven shots were fired.” This shows us how the soldiers, who were meant to be protecting the people of the colonies, fired on them, abusing their power of suitable artillery and showing how they quickly turned to violence as soon as they felt even slightly threatened. Secondly, on account of The London Chronicle “...fired his piece, after which six or seven others fired, by which three of the townspeople were killed upon the spot and several others wounded, one of which is since dead of his wounds.” This displays the disregard for the lives of the colonists that these soldiers truly had, going as far as to commit unjustified murder, and slaughtering 3 townspeople in what, according to what The London Chronicle states was just an “unhappy affair,” undeniably illustrating the lack of remorse they had for their actions and the Secondly, the British repeatedly imposed harsh taxes and constrictive laws against the colonists. For example, we can …show more content…
This shows that the colonists were forced into providing for the soldiers, all while being unfairly treated and brutally taxed at the same time, supporting the claim that the British would push the colonists into conformity with their laws. Thirdly, the British continued to use tactics of intimidation and demonstrated threatening behavior towards the colonists. This can be initially identified in the Limited HBO Series: John Adams, where the soldiers surrounded the townspeople in the square while an official was making an announcement. They even went as far as forcing unwilling women and children out of their homes and acting with hostility, showing how they weren’t afraid to intimidate the colonists. They also acted in threatening behavior, a multitude of times. For example, from the Boston Gazette, “When the boys had dispersed he met the ten or twelve soldiers aforesaid rushing down the alley towards the square and asked them if they intended to murder people? They answered Yes, by G-d, root, and branch!” This displays how
Blood on King Street: The True Antagonists.
On March 5, 1770, a conflict occurred in Boston between the British soldiers stationed in the town, and the colonists living there. This strife ultimately ended in the deaths of multiple townspeople and even more being injured. Some may argue that the colonists were at fault because they instigated the situation, but when we look closer, it is clear that they were only acting in a form of self-defense. The British were the ones truly at fault for the events of the Boston Massacre. This is confirmed firstly because the British conducted serious physical offenses against the colonists. Secondly, because the British repeatedly imposed …show more content…
Firstly, the British soldiers committed serious and violent physical offenses against the colonists. According to the Boston Gazette, “the soldiers continued to fire successively till seven or eight or, as some say, eleven shots were fired.” This shows us how the soldiers, who were meant to be protecting the people of the colonies, fired on them, abusing their power of suitable artillery and showing how they quickly turned to violence as soon as they felt even slightly threatened. Secondly, on account of The London Chronicle “...fired his piece, after which six or seven others fired, by which three of the townspeople were killed upon the spot and several others wounded, one of which is since dead of his wounds.” This displays the disregard for the lives of the colonists that these soldiers truly had, going as far as to commit unjustified murder, and slaughtering 3 townspeople in what, according to what The London Chronicle states was just an “unhappy affair,” undeniably illustrating the lack of remorse they had for their actions and the Secondly, the British repeatedly imposed harsh taxes and constrictive laws against the colonists. For example, we can …show more content…
This shows that the colonists were forced into providing for the soldiers, all while being unfairly treated and brutally taxed at the same time, supporting the claim that the British would push the colonists into conformity with their laws. Thirdly, the British continued to use tactics of intimidation and demonstrated threatening behavior towards the colonists. This can be initially identified in the Limited HBO Series: John Adams, where the soldiers surrounded the townspeople in the square while an official was making an announcement. They even went as far as forcing unwilling women and children out of their homes and acting with hostility, showing how they weren’t afraid to intimidate the colonists. They also acted in threatening behavior, a multitude of times. For example, from the Boston Gazette, “When the boys had dispersed he met the ten or twelve soldiers aforesaid rushing down the alley towards the square and asked them if they intended to murder people? They answered Yes, by G-d, root, and branch!” This displays how