The question of guilt surrounding Captain Preston and the soldiers in the Boston Massacre of 1770 is a complex one, and ultimately, I argue that they were not guilty of wrongdoing in the way that they were charged. In the heat of the moment, faced with an angry and escalating mob hurling insults and snowballs, the soldiers acted in self-defense when they fired their muskets. It is essential to consider the context of the situation: British soldiers were loathed by the colonists, and tensions were extremely high. Witnesses described the mob as aggressive, with some reports indicating that individuals were not just throwing snow but also what could be interpreted as lethal projectiles. Moreover, Captain Preston claimed that he never gave the command to fire, and this ambiguity raises questions about the soldiers' intent. The chaos of the moment likely clouded judgment, making any actions taken in the fray more understandable. Thus, while the tragic loss of life is undeniable and regrettable, the circumstances suggest that the soldiers' actions were a reaction to a perceived threat rather than a premeditated act of aggression.
Now, share your opinion by writing a paragraph.
State your argument: were Captain Preston and the soldiers guilty of wrongdoing?
Include examples and information from what you read.
1 answer
1 answer