Whose Fault Was The Boston Massacre

This event was between the Colonist and the English Soldiers. What happened during this event was a streetfight between the soldiers and the colonist and three people died that day and two died later. The ones who died in that event were Crispus Attucks, an African American, Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Samuel Maverick, and Patrick Carr. This event occur in Boston.This happened on March 5,1770. The historical question was who’s fault was it the colonist or the soldiers. Some people disagree with this event because some of them were against the soldiers and some of them were against the colonists. The disagreement or debate about this this event was whether who believe the colonists or the soldiers. My answer to the historical question is that

Then the colonist made it seem that it was the soldiers fault by writing articles and drawing pictures. I know this because if you see the image that Paul Revere about the Boston Massacre it shows how the colonist are just standing there begging for mercy but it seems that the soldiers are being mischievous by killing the colonist. This picture was drawn by Paul Revere, this image was made in Boston. This supports my evidence because Paul Revere was in a group called “Our Sons of Liberty” which was against the British Government, so Paul made it seem like it was all the soldiers fault because they are shooting the “innocent” colonists. Many people saw this article and image so they decided to join the colonists side and they when against the soldiers by stop buying all British

In the text it states, “I saw the people throw snowballs at the Soldiers and saw a stick about 3 feet long strike a soldier upon the right. He sallied and then fired. A little time a second.”This quote was stated in the article “Deposition of Theodore Bliss.” This article was made in Boston because a witness was saying what he witness. This supports my evidence because this is tells us how the colonists true colors. For example if you read any article about the Boston Massacre it makes it seem like it was the soldiers fault when it’s really the colonists fault for throwing stuff at soldiers and getting them mad. So at the end you could see that the colonist were the ones who started this and the soldiers were the ones who took over by using guns against the colonist. This is reliable because it helps describe how the colonists provoked the soldiers. This is not influential because it doesn’t describe that a whole lot about the soldiers being innocent. There are not that much facts like in the first one because of the same reason being that the people who wrote this used to be in the colonist