The sans-culottes were only watching their own back.
Source C is very much like Source D; it describes how the revolutionary army brought terror into people's eyes. In this source it tells how they were in the guilty city of Lyons. It states how the guillotine and the firing squad did "justice" to more than 400 rebels. Like source C it describes the blood shed within the terror. Through my own knowledge these killings made the situation worse. It only made the situation more tense and made people believe that they needed to get rid of the army to save them selves. The army felt justified when they executed the 400 odd rebels, they weren't though. They killed these rebels to make sure they were safe not to make the people of Paris feel safe. Like the sans-culottes they were only covering their own back. The action they took was poorly justified they picked on any one who said something about the revolution they didn't like or acted suspiciously.
Source E displays how no one was ever in control of the terror, that when the purpose and achievements became less self evident that the terror still raged on as no one was able to stop it. It says in it that to criticise the terror was to risk suspicion of sympathising with its victims, and therefore become one of them. By saying this it shows that the terror was out of control. When something becomes out of control it is hard to justify. Terror should not have been introduced as a basis for government. To justify that thousands upon thousands of people were killed because no one was in control is poor. When they started executing people for grieving for a dead relative through execution they should have opened their eyes and stoped the terror there. Through my own knowledge once they started executing people for any reason they saw fit the people of Paris revolted even more.
The terror affected the people of Paris and if it had been stoped sooner rather than latter and not as many people would of died, then it may have been easier to justify.