The Boston Massacre VS. The Kent State Massacre
By studying both the Boston Massacre and the Kent State Massacre, I have decided that through my research that the Kent State Massacre was the only real massacre between these two events. The citizens in both the Boston Massacre and the Kent State Massacre were not armed. The soldiers in both, the Boston Massacre and The Kent State Massacre were not acting in self defense. Both of these incidents could have been avoided.
The reason why the Kent State Massacre is the only true massacre between these two happenings is because by definition a massacre is the unnecessary killing of a large number of human beings and because the colonist in the Boston Massacre provoked the British troops by verbally daring them to shoot makes the word massacre void. There was a trial after the Boston Massacre and some troops lost there lives. While in the Kent State Massacre the National Guard lured the crowd down a hill and shot and killed protesters also innocent people. Proceeding the Boston Massacre there was a huge trial and some of the soldiers were killed for there wrong doing. But for the National Guard, they claimed they feared for there lives and fired for self defense and there was no punishment what so ever.
The Guardsmen at the scene of the Kent State Massacre did not shoot the students for self defense. The Guardsmen threw tear gas at the protesters and when the students threw the tear gas back at the Guardsmen, the soldiers pushed the crowd of angry young adults down to the bottom of Blanket Hill (a gathering spot for students on campus) and the soldiers marched back up the hill and began firing at the students. Four students were killed. Two students were just walking to class and was not part of the protest.
Both of these protesting mobs did not have any weapons. The colonist at the Boston Massacre threw ice and rocks at the British troops, but unlike the students at Kent state, verbally provoked the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document