ipl-logo

Why Is The Boston Massacre Be Justified

927 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: How did the american colonists feel justified in waging war and breaking away from britain

Although some people may believe that the colonists should not have claimed independence from Great Britain, they were justified to claim independence. This is because, the Boston Massacre showed Britain had no respect for the colonists, The early taxes imposed were unfair to the colonists, and the Intolerable acts were too aggressive. The colonists had many reasons for leaving Great Britain's control. That was for many of the mistakes Britain made and probably regretted. The Boston Massacre showed Britain had no respect for the colonists. The violence during the Massacre was un called for by Great Britain. Before it happened, Parliament repealed all townshend duties, except for the tea act. [pg.147]. This was the main reason for why the …show more content…

The Boston Tea party shouldn’t have resulted in the British taking away resources valuable to the colonists, as if they were governing the colonies and telling them how they were going to live. The Congress demanded a repeal of the Intolerable Acts, stating the colonies had the ability to tax and govern themselves. [pg.152]. Great Britain was constantly putting limits and decreasing the colonists freedom and independence. The Intolerable Acts had helped the British reinforce they could still control the colonies, but the colonists had differed. The Intolerable Acts were too much of an overkill on a statement the colonists were trying to make. Also the Quebec Act, part of the Intolerable Acts, took away colonists’ western lands. [pg.151]. This act completely limited the colonists expansion of the colonies and slowed future plans. The western expansion was critical for the colonies to be able to evolve, and the British just took that from them. The act of taking land was an example of excessive force and the British taking their power as an advantage. That was not the correct way Great Britain should have punished the colonies if they really wanted to, which they did. To cap it off, page 151 of the textbook, explains, “The Boston Tea Party outraged the British government.” The British were furious of what had happened, which sparked the Intolerable Acts, because they thought the colonists had known to respect their other taxing. However, the colonists had no way to express their opinions and feelings about the British taxes, and they only way was to take action and make the British feel how the colonists had been feeling. But, that didn’t give Great Britain the right to just slap on taxes and acts that would greatly affect the colonists

Show More
Related
254 Words | 2 Pages

I choose to read “Boston Massacre Oration, March 5, 1772” by Joseph Warren. In this document, he points out how to people of the province have no representation at the British House of Commons. The citizens of the province should have the constitutional right to elect or choose someone to represent them and if they so choose to create a bill for taxations, but without representation the imposing of taxes on the colonies is wrong. One of the many reasons that taxation was so high for the colonists was because the British wanted to make a profit without having to provide any services, one of the main purposes of founding the colony was so they could be taxed. If the colonies did not submit to the taxation they would have their homes and land

Read More
496 Words | 2 Pages

Out of rage due to the chaos of taxed tea, Boston rebels disguised themselves as Indians and dumped the British tea into the Boston harbor. King George III out of spite and anger forced parliament to set up the intolerable act which shut down the boston harbor because the colonists refused to pay for the damage done and set up the quartering act which forced colonists to house soldiers in barracks provided by

Read More
111 Words | 1 Pages

Raven, you are right. The British felt as if the colonies should accept the consequences for the colonists ' actions at the Boston Tea Party. As a form of punishment, the British passed the Intolerable Acts. The Intolerable Acts included the following: the Boston Port Act, which closed Boston 's port until the East India Company was repaid; the Massachusetts Government Act, which empowered the king to elect government officials in Massachusetts; the Administration of Justice Act, which allowed the government to move a colonist 's trial to another colony if a fair trial was unavailable in Massachusetts; and the Quartering Act, which permitted British troops to occupy vacant buildings when in the

Read More
756 Words | 4 Pages

On the night of December 16, 1773, Samuel Adams and other people from the Sons Of Liberty got on three ships in the Boston Harbor and threw tons of tea overboard. This was unjustified because it was destruction of private property. They didn’t own the ships, Britain did. They also betrayed the crown that was protecting them. Lastly, their protest was too harsh.

Read More
1236 Words | 5 Pages

The final reason the colonists were unjustified was that they were the only reason Britain had treated them so poorly. As a result of the French and Indian War - which was fought for the colonists - the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Townshend Act of 1767 were used to pay for war efforts. Also, the Proclamation of 1763, which forced colonists to live east of the Application Mountains, protected the colonists from the Indians and prevented future conflicts between them. The Intolerable Acts of 1774 would not have existed if not for the Boston Tea Party - in which the colonists dumped about 1 million dollars worth of tea into the Boston Harbor: it only existed to demonstrate Britain’s power over the colonists. Finally, the Boston Massacre would have

Read More
1470 Words | 6 Pages

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.

Read More
1558 Words | 7 Pages

The American Boston tea party was probably the most unreasonable and destructive action taken by either of the two parties during this period, yet somehow historians portray this act as a sign of courage and independence. However, no matter how unreasonable the Americans were, they got the response they wanted from the British. The British responded to the Boston Tea Party with the “Coercive Acts” or the “Intolerable Acts” as some put it (“The Third Imperial Crisis”). This is where British reasonability exited the picture. The Intolerable Acts were four different acts that served as punishment rather than advancement of the British economy.

Read More
330 Words | 2 Pages

On March 5th 1770, British Soldiers shot and killed five colonists and injured 10 of them. The tragic event was nicknamed “The Bloody Massacre”, but the colonists were at fault because they were the ones that provoked the soldiers, they attacked the soldiers, and they created a chaotic scene. First reason why the colonists were at fault is because they are the ones that provoked the soldiers. (Paragraph 2 of page 155 from the book United States History Colonization through Reconstruction written by Michael B. Stoff and James West Davidson) “A crowd gathered…colonists shouted insults.”

Read More
539 Words | 3 Pages

The British government was not looking for the best of the people. They were only thinking about what they wanted; the government was not interested in what the people wanted so they decided to make decisions on their own, which resulted in changes that form the United States today. Because of this, they were justified in rebelling and declaring independence. One reason why the colonists decided to rebel and declare independence was because of taxation.

Read More
102 Words | 1 Pages

The Boston Massacre was self-defense because according to history from books on March 5,1770 groups of colonist decided to riot and surround the British soldiers, Throwing things at the soldiers and taunting them to fire. My first argument is Crispus Attucks took a cordwood stick and swung it at one of the soldiers who protected him from the blow. Attucks was yelling" Kill the dogs"! " Knock them over!" This is self-defense because Crispus Attucks struck the soldier first, and once the soldier was hit he could act back upon the hit and could do anything to protect himself from a contact

Read More
558 Words | 3 Pages

and they too were attacked so they had to fire into the mob. Parliament passed the Tea Act, which gave the British East Indians company a complete monopoly of the American tea business meaning the colonists could only buy tea from this company. The colonists opposed this law even though it lowered the price of tea. They viewed the tea Act as merely another example

Read More
281 Words | 2 Pages

However, the reason the British Government had rule over the colonies in the first place was because of the British immigrants that moved from Britain over America. Whilst other European countries also did this, the 12 colonies were ruled and ‘owned’ by the British, for example, the French had control of Canada, or at least a substantial part of Canada, like territories such as Newfoundland. However, the British, in order to maintain control, used force which went too far in the example of the Boston Massacre. The Boston Massacre occurred when a group of Colonists taunted the British soldiers guarding a customs house and threw snowballs at the guards and when one hit Hugh Montgomery he pulled his rifle out on the crowd, which began the firing

Read More
672 Words | 3 Pages

Tensions were high in Boston between the British and the Colonists. Between the Boston Massacre in 1770 and the Boston Tea Party in 1773, Britain was very upset with Boston. King George III, the Lord North- led British government and many of the British citizens were very upset and irritated when they found out that the Boston colonists had made “Tea with salt water”. Once the parliament heard of their escapade, they began thinking of a way to insure that there would be no more uprisings in the Massachusetts colony.

Read More
580 Words | 3 Pages

The American Revolution was, to date, the best event to happen on American soil, providing freedom and representation in government to the individuals who fought so hard for it. France and Spain aided our cause, helping this group of brave colonists to defeat the strongest army in the world. But, there is a question still not answered; were the colonists justified in breaking away from Britain? The American colonists were justified in breaking away from the British because there was taxation without representation, they had no freedom, and the British government violated their individual British rights. I believe the American colonists were justified for breaking away from Britain because there was taxation without representation.

Read More
615 Words | 3 Pages

The Boston Harbor was the property that was taken from us. Your intolerable acts were cruel and unkind. Put your feet in our shoes! If you were taxed for tea you would of done the same circumstance we did. Also, it was very selfish of you to forbade any town meetings and restrain the quartering act.

Read More

More about Why Is The Boston Massacre Be Justified

Related Topics

Open Document