On May 4, 1970, Ohio National Guard soldiers fired on unarmed student protesters at Kent State University, killing four students and wounding nine. This paper examines the events leading to the tragedy—from President Nixon's announcement of the Cambodia invasion to escalating campus tensions—and analyzes its profound impact on American society. The shooting deepened the nation's cultural and generational divide over the Vietnam War and prompted widespread student protests, ultimately influencing government policy. The paper also addresses historical inaccuracies in educational materials and argues that the Kent State tragedy remains an essential lesson about the costs of war and the importance of protecting constitutional rights to free speech and assembly.
On May 4, 1970, the lives of four students were lost at Kent State University after shots were fired by soldiers of the Ohio National Guard. The guards fired rounds killing four students and wounding nine others. More than forty years later, the event remains largely absent from American historical consciousness. The truth is that, comparable to other national tragedies, Americans often prefer not to remember our defeats and our many lost lives in war—especially in Vietnam. Perhaps, like this event, remembering is too difficult to process emotionally. The significant legacy of the Kent State shooting, however, was not simply what occurred on campus that day, but rather how this event impacted American society and continues to shape our understanding of protest, state power, and generational conflict.
In 1968, the presidential campaign was won by Richard Nixon, who promised the American people "peace with honor" for the Vietnam War. Hoping for an end to war and a promise to bring their troops home, the American people supported President Nixon and his promises of peace. Nixon seemed to be keeping to his word until April 1970. On April 30, 1970, President Richard M. Nixon appeared on national television to announce the invasion of Cambodia by the United States and the need to draft 150,000 more soldiers for an expansion of the Vietnam War effort (Foner, E., & Garrety, J., 1991). President Nixon addressed in his speech that the reason to send more troops was in defense against an increase of violence from North Vietnamese forces in Cambodia. He also stated that this effort was meant to quickly dissolve the war and bring the troops home faster. However, many citizens did not believe that President Nixon was being completely honest and suspected a longer war lay ahead. The American response to President Nixon's speech and the pending draft was an outpouring of rallies and protests from students all over the United States. The conflict between generations emerged, and the American people became torn politically and culturally.
The events that led up to the Kent State tragedy began on May 1, 1970. A protest was held in a large outdoor area in the center of the Kent State campus where many prior events had been held. Speeches were given and students listened intently. The anti-war rallies officially began at Kent State. The tension and anger grew as more and more students protested the draft and the Vietnam War. A copy of the Constitution was buried to symbolize what students saw as the murder of the Constitution, since Congress had never declared war (Lewis, J., & Hensley, T., 1998). Later that night, protesters gathered at local bars and discussed the earlier events. Many met on campus and built a bonfire, heckling police officers responding to complaints of rowdy students. Students threw objects and bottles at the officers, and the protests began to spiral out of control.
A state of emergency was declared the next morning, May 2, 1970, by the mayor of Kent. The request for assistance from the Ohio National Guard was sanctioned, and the arrival of troops began that evening. The soldiers arrived to find flames engulfing the R.O.T.C. building at the university. It remains unclear who set the building on fire (Kent State Shooting, n.d.). The controversy centers on whether protesters or someone seeking to incriminate them was responsible. The Guardsmen dispersed crowds of students and protesters using tear gas. On May 3, 1970, the Ohio National Guard was again called to another protest held on campus to disperse rallying crowds (Rosenburg, J., n.d.). These escalating events proved significant as they accumulated tension, anger, and fear that would culminate in tragedy the next day.
On May 4, 1970, another rally was planned. Resentment lingered that day due to the previous night's events, which had resulted in police arresting more than sixty-nine people and soldiers invading campus dormitories. The rally began when students rang a Victory bell, normally used to celebrate football victories. With the protest underway and students filling the outdoor area, a jeep drove onto the campus holding National Guardsmen. Orders for the protesters to leave were shouted to the crowd, but they went unheeded. The Guardsmen began to disperse tear gas canisters into the crowd, forcing students to move up a small hill to escape the gas. The armed soldiers followed the unarmed students uphill as the crowd began to scatter. As some students headed down the hill and others moved toward a parking lot, the soldiers positioned themselves near the parking lot and launched more tear gas canisters. A few students ran to retrieve the smoke canisters and threw them back at the soldiers in retaliation. Most did not reach the troops, although one landed near the Guardsmen, prompting cheers from the crowd. Protesters chanted "Pigs off campus" and cursed the war (Kifner, J., 1970). Stones and debris were thrown by the crowd toward the Guardsmen as the troops began to back away in defense, heading back up the hill. After retreating for several minutes, a change occurred: the troops then began to turn around and head back toward the crowd of students.
For reasons unknown and debated to this day, the Ohio National Guardsmen turned and fired their M-1 rifles into the dispersed students. An eyewitness from the event recalls in a personal interview, "When I went around beside Lake/Johnson complex, and I ran into a student, whose name I can't remember, it doesn't matter, who was screaming. She had a face cloth over her, and she was screaming hysterically and crying about how many people had been shot. I just didn't believe it. She said, 'Yes. There are people that are dead, there's blood all over the place'" (Adams W., 1990, May). In thirteen seconds, sixty-seven bullets were fired (Rosenburg, J., n.d.). Nine other students were treated for gunshot wounds at the local hospital, some in critical condition.
Concern remains about the cause and liability for the deaths of the unarmed students. Nevertheless, all parties agree that it was an avoidable tragedy (McGrath, J., 2009). The American people's response to the massacre resulted in considerably different opinions. Government officials initially made statements that circumvented responsibility, and at the same time, to some extent, hinted at blaming the unarmed students for their behavior and controversial protests. Richard Nixon summed up this attitude in his statement, "When dissent turns to violence, it invites tragedy" (McGrath, J., 2009). The statement that President Nixon made was not only cold in reaction to the lives taken from four innocent students; the statement's undertones suggested that the unarmed students were also to blame. The young students and protesters were not only blamed but were despised by some Americans across the nation. The Guardsmen responded that they were in fear for their lives and that was the reason for the shootings. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to their safety, and therefore they had to fire in self-defense (Lewis, J., & Hensley, T., 1998).
Although many Americans blamed the innocent, unarmed students, others saw and understood the truth in the tragedy. The shootings at Kent State impacted some Americans so profoundly that their views on the role the United States played in the Vietnam War were completely reformed. After the shootings, students from universities and high schools across the nation closed in protest. Young people nationwide suspected the Kent State massacre was planned to suppress further protests arising from the announcement that the already controversial Vietnam War had expanded into Cambodia (Krause, L., 2012). What was happening overseas in Vietnam was exactly what was happening at home: youth being murdered in the name of a war that was never America's to fight. The controversial catastrophe led President Nixon to physical and emotional collapse, and he promptly withdrew the U.S. military invasion of Cambodia (Canfora, A., 1997). The majority of American opinion was rapidly shifting against the Vietnam War. Change had never occurred so rapidly following a protest. The opinions of many that the draft and Vietnam War were a defeat for the country were being validated by the response from the President and government officials themselves.
Extensive information and literature exist on the Kent State shootings. However, this literature includes misinformation, wrong facts, and controversial opinions presented as established truth. Researchers of this historical event must exercise caution when collecting information on the Kent State shootings. False information can be found surprisingly in textbooks as well. One example appears in a United States history book by Mary Beth Norton (1994), used by advanced placement high school students. A picture from the event includes the following summary: "In May 1970, at Kent State University in Ohio, National Guardsmen confronted student antiwar protesters with a tear gas barrage. Soon afterward, with no provocation, soldiers opened fire into a group of fleeing students. Four young people were killed, shot in the back, including two women who had been walking to class" (Lewis, J., & Hensley, T., 1998). Although brief, this summary contains misinformation taught to students. To correct the inaccuracies: the students were not fleeing when shots were initially fired, only one student was shot and killed in the back, and only one student was not involved in the rally but was instead walking to class. The other three students killed were directly involved in the protest. Some survivors from the Kent State shooting speak to students and annually attend the memorial held at Kent State. They remain aware of the controversies surrounding the event and share their personal, firsthand perspectives.
The tragedy that occurred on the Kent State campus was a result of the generation gap that emerged during the 1960s. The Vietnam War split generations to the point of violence. This event allowed all Americans to see what was occurring overseas reflected at home: the murder of the innocent and youth drafted to a war that would never be won. No matter how a person forms their opinions of these events, the facts must be considered. On that day, no student was armed with weapons, the soldiers were unprepared and untrained for the situation, and government officials reacted in a way that shocked the nation—responding with denial and blame of others. This was a tragedy that was unfortunately avoidable. However, the four students who lost their lives that day did not die in vain; they gave their lives in defense of American rights across the nation. This event offers a lesson that everyone from all walks of life can learn from indefinitely. When preparing for possible confrontations, troops are known to receive caution from supervisors stating, "Remember we don't want another Kent State shooting."
The shootings at Kent State should always be remembered because this event marked a great tragedy in American history. At the peak of the Vietnam War, America was divided culturally and politically. Images from this massacre will always symbolize the horrific event that took place at home because of a war thousands of miles away. This event remains controversial and is still being discussed and speculated upon because of the impact it has had on so many. The healing process continues to this day. America should learn from this tragedy and the guardsmen could have dealt with the situation in a much better way.
Through all the interpretations and questions that still face the events of May 4, 1970, the tragic shootings of Kent State must not be forgotten. Like the legacy of the Iraq War and the Cold War, this event exposes the truth about what human beings are capable of. The difficult truth to realize is that being a good American citizen sometimes means supporting our country no matter what the cost, how many lives are lost, or for what reason, because it is considered the righteous act for the nation. The protests against the Vietnam War and the Kent State shootings carry an enormously important message: that war, like the battle between good and evil, is what America's children are marching off to—not because citizens are forced, but because Americans send them willingly.
"Kent State reveals the cost of war and must inform American civic values"
You’re 93% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.