Maybe you should check out the trial transcripts, and notice that John Adams, though a patriot, was lead counsel defending them. He was assisted by Josiah Quincy the second, also a patriot, as well as the speaker for the Sons of Liberty. Both men believed it was crucial to the future of what they were fighting for to ensure that all men received fair trials, not based on opinions or loyalties, but based on the law and the evidence. Two men were convicted of manslaughter, and the others found innocent. There is a reason for that.
Firstly on the subject of "taxation without representation"; this was actually no different from the majority of people in Britain at the time - only landowners were permitted to vote, everybody else - the majority - could not vote but were expected to pay their taxes or face harsh punishment. Secondly, the taxes imposed on the American colonists were primarily used to fund the defence of the colonies. Not an unreasonable expectation. Thirdly, the taxes the colonists were expected to pay were, in most cases, much lower than the taxes paid in Britain. Now to the 'massacre'. Private Hugh White, standing guard outside the Boston Custom House repremanded 13 year old Edward Garrick for being disrespectful to a British Officer. Not unreasonable when repect for elders was expected of young people of the time. Garrick responded by being abusive and jabbing Private White with his finger repeatedly. This would be the equivalent of doing the same to a modern day police officer and in response White knocked him down with his rifle butt. A large group of colonists started to form led by the former slave Crispus Attucks and they began throwing rocks and other objects at the severely outnumbered sentry whilst goading him to open fire. Captain Thomas Preston and six men arrived to support Private White who by this time was facing 300-400 angry rioters. The crowd continued to pelt the soldiers with rocks. The soldiers did not load their muskets - they arrived with muskets loaded and bayonets fixed. Despite continual goading from the crowd daring the soldiers to open fire they did not do so. One of the crowd asked if the weapons were loaded and Preston replied in the affirmative but stated the soldiers would not fire unless ordered to do so. After some time a missile struck one of the soldiers and knocked him down. His musket discharged - it is not entirely clear if he intende to fire or if it went off as a result of his being knocked down but, as is often the way the result was that the other soldiers opened fire. Without orders to do so. Eleven colonists were hit with three dying instantly. One died the next day and another two weeks later. One man, Christopher Monk received serious wounds which may have contributed to his death a decade later. The rioting crowd dispersed and the soldiers were arrested the next day. Immediately colonists began a propaganda war publishing pamphlets that demonized the soldiers, most famously the engraving by Paul Revere (who actually plagiarized the engraving from Henry Pelham). Future President John Adams presided over the trial describing the colonist crowd as "a motley rabble of saucy boys, negroes, and molattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish Jack Tarrs... ...why we should scruple to call such a set of people a mob, I can't conceive, unless the name is too respectable for them. The sun is not about to stand still or go out, nor the rivers to dry up because there was a mob in Boston on the 5th of March that attacked a party of soldiers." He argued that the soldiers had the legal right to fight back against the mob and so were innocent. If they were provoked but not endangered, he argued, they were at most guilty of manslaughter. The jury agreed with Adams and acquitted six of the soldiers and found two guilty of manslaughter. The sentence of having their hands branded seems to play out the belief that even with the manslaughter verdict, the provocation they recieved from the crowd was mitigation enough to avoid a death sentence. Before he died, one of the colonists, Patrick Carr an Irishman, defended the actions of the soldiers saying that he had "frequently seen mobs, and soldiers called upon to quell them..." and that he had "seen soldiers often fire on the people in Ireland, but had never seen them [the soldiers] bear half so much [provocation] before they fired." The evidence shows that the "Boston Massacre" was merely self defence carried out by eight fearful soldiers who were severely outnumbered by a mob of 400 violent colonists - a view accepted by a colonial court of law overseen by a Patriot judge who would become the first US Vice President and second President and the patience under extreme duress shown by the soldiers was acknowledged by at least one of the mob on his death bed. Can the deaths of five men and the wounding of six others from a group of 400 at the hands of eight soldiers be termed a massacre? I don't think so. Massacres tend to be carried out by a superior force on another group of lesser number. There is no argument that can be made for an outnumbered force facing hostility and violence at the hands of far superior numbers being guilty of a "massacre". If the soldiers had not opened fire the result would likely have been their deaths at the hands of the mob. And that WOULD have been a massacre.
Its more self defense, British soldiers doing there duty guarding the customs house when a mob of angry people started to harass and threaten them. The mob grew bigger and bigger then the soldiers got backup and the redcoats then opened fire when attacked. While the British attacked 1st yes and it kicked off everything off it would be self defense with perhaps probation for the 1st musket strike redcoat. What would you do if you were standing there guarding a building and a mob of angry people came up to you and started to attack you???? You would open fire with your gun!!!! Then claim self defense.
Also, someone nearby who wasn't in charge of the soldiers was shouting fire. It debated on whether it was mockery of the soldiers or there was a literal fire nearby.
@@sabercooler5024 english people in britain proper were taxed more than colonists and the colonists had so many liberties, plus the british fought and sacrificed so much for them in the 7 years war
This quick review of American history was inaccurate and didn’t mention the significance of the American individual who speared their lives in detail. This lacks tones of information and important facts.
Well, it’s a short little youtube video, it’s not a semester long college course😅. By the way, i think you meant to say “Spared” instead of speared, and “tons” instead of tones🤷♂️
It's very misleading and inaccurate. People need to read the trial transcript. John Adams and Josiah Quincy the second were patriots and members of The Sons of Liberty. They wanted to ensure the trial was fair and that justice prevailed, not mob mentality.
Takes me back to 1982, the first time i heard this lesson as a little 5th grader. The textbook had that same picture of the soldiers firing on the crowd😅
The revolution war in Boston Massachusetts is so bad they have no more police there all dead and gone only a handful is left alive in the whole state that's from the new mofia the revolution.
bro I love the dramatic editing, it kept me very intrigued. Amazing video (and I won't fail my homework now)
Ayo how she talking without a mouth?-🤠
😶
Lol
MINDSPEAK!?!?
inner monologue
Video editing and voice over duh
Love what you're doing, please keep them coming
I think they were found not guilty by reason of self defense.
RIP
To the five American colonists who were murdered by the 29th Regiment in the Boston Massacre
Maybe you should check out the trial transcripts, and notice that John Adams, though a patriot, was lead counsel defending them. He was assisted by Josiah Quincy the second, also a patriot, as well as the speaker for the Sons of Liberty. Both men believed it was crucial to the future of what they were fighting for to ensure that all men received fair trials, not based on opinions or loyalties, but based on the law and the evidence. Two men were convicted of manslaughter, and the others found innocent. There is a reason for that.
@@derklebob8161 History is history! We cannot do anything about it.
Who’s here for studying
Me
I am😅
Meh
Me
Me
Even back then. The black dude HAS to die first huh? Fml lol
🤣
Many black patriots were killed during the revolutionary war.
Lmao
Like wearing a red shirt on the USS Enterprise.
I had a essay on this thank you.
same lol
Same
Firstly on the subject of "taxation without representation"; this was actually no different from the majority of people in Britain at the time - only landowners were permitted to vote, everybody else - the majority - could not vote but were expected to pay their taxes or face harsh punishment.
Secondly, the taxes imposed on the American colonists were primarily used to fund the defence of the colonies. Not an unreasonable expectation.
Thirdly, the taxes the colonists were expected to pay were, in most cases, much lower than the taxes paid in Britain.
Now to the 'massacre'. Private Hugh White, standing guard outside the Boston Custom House repremanded 13 year old Edward Garrick for being disrespectful to a British Officer. Not unreasonable when repect for elders was expected of young people of the time. Garrick responded by being abusive and jabbing Private White with his finger repeatedly. This would be the equivalent of doing the same to a modern day police officer and in response White knocked him down with his rifle butt.
A large group of colonists started to form led by the former slave Crispus Attucks and they began throwing rocks and other objects at the severely outnumbered sentry whilst goading him to open fire.
Captain Thomas Preston and six men arrived to support Private White who by this time was facing 300-400 angry rioters.
The crowd continued to pelt the soldiers with rocks. The soldiers did not load their muskets - they arrived with muskets loaded and bayonets fixed. Despite continual goading from the crowd daring the soldiers to open fire they did not do so. One of the crowd asked if the weapons were loaded and Preston replied in the affirmative but stated the soldiers would not fire unless ordered to do so.
After some time a missile struck one of the soldiers and knocked him down. His musket discharged - it is not entirely clear if he intende to fire or if it went off as a result of his being knocked down but, as is often the way the result was that the other soldiers opened fire. Without orders to do so.
Eleven colonists were hit with three dying instantly. One died the next day and another two weeks later. One man, Christopher Monk received serious wounds which may have contributed to his death a decade later.
The rioting crowd dispersed and the soldiers were arrested the next day.
Immediately colonists began a propaganda war publishing pamphlets that demonized the soldiers, most famously the engraving by Paul Revere (who actually plagiarized the engraving from Henry Pelham).
Future President John Adams presided over the trial describing the colonist crowd as "a motley rabble of saucy boys, negroes, and molattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish Jack Tarrs... ...why we should scruple to call such a set of people a mob, I can't conceive, unless the name is too respectable for them. The sun is not about to stand still or go out, nor the rivers to dry up because there was a mob in Boston on the 5th of March that attacked a party of soldiers." He argued that the soldiers had the legal right to fight back against the mob and so were innocent. If they were provoked but not endangered, he argued, they were at most guilty of manslaughter.
The jury agreed with Adams and acquitted six of the soldiers and found two guilty of manslaughter. The sentence of having their hands branded seems to play out the belief that even with the manslaughter verdict, the provocation they recieved from the crowd was mitigation enough to avoid a death sentence.
Before he died, one of the colonists, Patrick Carr an Irishman, defended the actions of the soldiers saying that he had "frequently seen mobs, and soldiers called upon to quell them..." and that he had "seen soldiers often fire on the people in Ireland, but had never seen them [the soldiers] bear half so much [provocation] before they fired."
The evidence shows that the "Boston Massacre" was merely self defence carried out by eight fearful soldiers who were severely outnumbered by a mob of 400 violent colonists - a view accepted by a colonial court of law overseen by a Patriot judge who would become the first US Vice President and second President and the patience under extreme duress shown by the soldiers was acknowledged by at least one of the mob on his death bed.
Can the deaths of five men and the wounding of six others from a group of 400 at the hands of eight soldiers be termed a massacre? I don't think so.
Massacres tend to be carried out by a superior force on another group of lesser number. There is no argument that can be made for an outnumbered force facing hostility and violence at the hands of far superior numbers being guilty of a "massacre".
If the soldiers had not opened fire the result would likely have been their deaths at the hands of the mob. And that WOULD have been a massacre.
Its more self defense, British soldiers doing there duty guarding the customs house when a mob of angry people started to harass and threaten them. The mob grew bigger and bigger then the soldiers got backup and the redcoats then opened fire when attacked. While the British attacked 1st yes and it kicked off everything off it would be self defense with perhaps probation for the 1st musket strike redcoat. What would you do if you were standing there guarding a building and a mob of angry people came up to you and started to attack you???? You would open fire with your gun!!!! Then claim self defense.
But would you defend against angry tea hungry Americans?
Also, someone nearby who wasn't in charge of the soldiers was shouting fire. It debated on whether it was mockery of the soldiers or there was a literal fire nearby.
It’s not townSHend with a SH sound. It’s Townshend with a Send sound, H is silent. Sorry I pointed that out. It bothered me.
It bothered me too!
Great video, but the music is bit too loud, making it somewhat hard to her the narration.
Thanks I had a essay
Pls increase music volume, almost understood what was said
2:45 the Boston Massacre (st. Valentines day massacre)
The colonist play zero build I bet plus they could just shokwave out of there.
so reel
Yeah fr why didnt they get his reboot card
redcoats avatar added to fortnite when?
so they provoked and threw rocks and then cried
Hey I am watching this because my teacher told me to watch this
The British soldiers were just doing their job, none of them should have been charged, and the 'massacre' name needs to go.
No they are guilty
@Noob take a joke
@Noob they’re fault for taxing us unfairly.
@@sabercooler5024 english people in britain proper were taxed more than colonists and the colonists had so many liberties, plus the british fought and sacrificed so much for them in the 7 years war
@@varangianguard7102 yeah and only for them to pass the proclamation of 1763? So much for fighting for “us”.
Thanks 🙏
I'm doing GCSE history, does anyone know if any British soldiors die before or in the Boston massacre.
hold on my teacher told us that a captain told the soldiers dont shoot but they thought the captian said shoot who do i trust 2:36
I watched this in class 🏍️
Fortinite battlepass
how does she know this
This quick review of American history was inaccurate and didn’t mention the significance of the American individual who speared their lives in detail. This lacks tones of information and important facts.
Well, it’s a short little youtube video, it’s not a semester long college course😅. By the way, i think you meant to say “Spared” instead of speared, and “tons” instead of tones🤷♂️
It's very misleading and inaccurate. People need to read the trial transcript. John Adams and Josiah Quincy the second were patriots and members of The Sons of Liberty. They wanted to ensure the trial was fair and that justice prevailed, not mob mentality.
Takes me back to 1982, the first time i heard this lesson as a little 5th grader. The textbook had that same picture of the soldiers firing on the crowd😅
The only reason I watched this cause of my teacher
Please make video of federalism
Those Bostonians were just checking out the Customs House. Couldn't be a real revolution, they didn't even have guns! #sarcasm
i dont like scool :/
But seems like you need it 😐 ... Jk
Yeah it be like that.
Of course the 1st one killed was a Former Slave🤣🤣 & of Course they got off🤣🤣🤣
Serious?
This isn’t accurate though the man killed was Crispus Attucks and although he was at one point a slave he had escaped slavery
@@Bill_tylerso he WAS a FORMER slave like they said…so what’s not accurate?🤔
The revolution war in Boston Massachusetts is so bad they have no more police there all dead and gone only a handful is left alive in the whole state that's from the new mofia the revolution.
hi
Hopefully we won’t have. To do it again
Skool go brrrrrrrr
Snow ball fight results in the death of five people
There were rocks as well, also it believed someone nearby was shouting fire
Bruh
Like that
lmfao
🤭🤔😨
Hi my nameis viviana
Black power yoza
using this to study thank you🫶