Similarities between the Boston and Kent State Massacre

Boston Massacre and the Kent State Massacre
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Boston Massacre and the Kent State Massacre
           While the Boston Massacre (1770) and the Kent State Massacre (1970) are two historical events widely separated by timing and situations, they evoke essential similarities beyond period coincident as they occurred almost two centuries apart. Historians and other scholars have drawn parallels from the occurrences based on their background, dynamics, and significance to modern Americans. On March 5, 1770, American colonists violently protested against the repressive British tax laws such as the Townshend Act and Stamp Act by throwing sticks, stones, and snowballs at soldiers. The move provoked the soldiers to fire at the colonialists resulting in five people, Crispus Attucks, James Caldwell, Patrick Carr, Samuel Gray, and Samuel Maverick losing their lives (History.com, 2021). The Boston Massacre would later trigger the American Revolution. In another similar incident that happened on May 4, 1970, four students from Kent State University, Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer, and William Schroeder, lost their lives after the National Guard troops fired at them. The students were holding a peaceful protest against America’s involvement in the Vietnamese war (History, 2018). Both Boston and the Kent State Massacres raise essential questions that scholars have examined over history in terms of the important similarities they present and if at all, these protests could have been avoided or whether they were necessary in the first place. 
           In both massacres, the involved parties should have embraced proper approaches and should not have necessarily claimed lives. Captain Thomas Preston, the man who stepped in with a backup of several soldiers to prevent mass riots from the colonists, confessed that neither the victims nor the soldiers were victors. The victims of the Boston Massacre, who Preston refers to as “troublemakers” who lost lives undeservedly, should not have advanced the squabble. To the soldiers, he reported that they should not have engaged with the colonists but rather demonstrate professionalism without panic (History, 2021). These statements from Preston show that the event could have been avoided with better approaches and was, therefore, unnecessary. He wrote in his report that the whole issue should not have occurred in ...