Who was at fault for the Boston massacre?

In the
years between the French and Indian War, Boston became a center of colonial discontent. The
British government would respond to these growing tensions by sending troops into the Colonies,
strengthening their military presence (but in the process, they only further intensified the
crisis).

In general, I would suggest that the Boston Massacre should be
understood as an incident of crowd violence (and as is the case with a great many examples:
conflicts involving crowds will tend to escalate and often take on a life on its own). Generally
speaking, I would concur with the other contributors who have already answered this question:
blame falls on both sides of the incident, and some degree of fault should therefore be leveled
upon all parties involved.

Even beyond that, though, I think the tensions
and discontent present within Boston should be understood as a critical factor alongside the
human crowd mentality. Discontent was already high even before the British government sent
in...