The Boston Massacre was one of the most important events of the colonial times. But this controversial topic brings up the question of whether or not the Boston Massacre was really a massacre. I believe it was just a cold war that broke into few shots fired and a few dead carried off. I believe that this entire incident was a huge misunderstanding. Through reasoning and valid evidence I will clear up this misunderstanding and you too will believe that the Boston Massacre was not a Massacre.
My first reason for proving that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre is that it had no massacre content. The evidence comes from the historical context. The historical context states that a mob started throwing snowballs at the soldiers. The soldiers reacted and fired some shots into the crowd. Four people died on the scene and one died four days later. The definition of a massacre is the violent killing of many people. Because of the incident did not match the definition is one of the reasons why the Boston Massacre was not a Massacre.
My second reason proving that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre is that the entire incident was one huge accident. The evidence that supports my reasoning comes from Captain Thomas Preston's account in document two. Document two states that one soldier was struck on the arm with a club. The soldier was unbalanced and leaned on a little bit on his side and instantly fired. Captain Thomas Preston then states that he gave no orders to fire, but instead he said that his words were "don't fire, stop your firing. " That evidence supports my reason that this was one mistake.
My third reason that proves that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre is that the colonist instigated the shooting. The evidence that supports my reason comes from the testimony of Newton Prince in document eight. Newton Prince states that the mob was attacking the guards. The mob was also screaming "fire " at the soldiers.