Cruelty of many Faces

Now we all know the story of how the British taxed the colonists so heavily that they weren't making a profit off of their work nor were they hardly even scraping by. And then, after the people had enough of that, we brought the pain on the British and joined together, took a long hard trip through the wilderness in the middle of winter, sacrificed a lot of our men to poor nutrition and ill health, but then we decided to cross the Delaware river in mid December, attack the opposing side in their drunken stupor, and eventually we overcame British rule by kickin' their butts.

But that story makes it sound like the Americans didn't do anything out of the question, or at least questionable. But as a matter of fact, there were certain colonists who, in my own opinion, took their suppression a little out of hand. Not all of them were involved in these radical groups, or more commonly known as mobs, but still, this doesn't weaken the impact of what was performed.

Yes, I understand that the British had the best military in the world, that they had the best equipment and weapons, and the colonists only had clubs or very weak guns and such to fight in combat. I also realize that the British were unfair in charging the colonists for their own debt that tripled over the Seven Years War, but that doesn't mean that acting out in violence that causes personal harm or death is acceptable. I still believe that there could have been non-violent to go about protesting instead of tar and feathering people, burning and beheading effigies of certain members of Parliament or tax collectors, and then coming after them, destroying everything in their way.

I know that many people think that since I wasn't there, I wouldn't really know the answer to this, nor do I have evidence that it would have worked, but I do believe in violence as a last resort. Did the think to all join in as one united force and protest these people? They could have surrounded Parliament and protested, either silently or verbally, but they didn't need to lead to such extents to end up in a British Massacre. Maybe we wouldn't look as glorious as we Americans now perceive our history to be, but if it did work, and we still had Washington to lead the small army across the Delaware River, and we did successfully overrule the British rule, would that change the way we handle situations now? Would we turn to protests and non-violent action before we thought of punching someone in the face?

I know this is a stretch and a half, but its food for thought. These small bits of history, if only they were changed or erased, could they make a difference today?