Harry shouldn't have spared Black (was: spare V'mort)

[Melody]

No: HPFGUIDX 46442

Ali wrote:
> That is a very different scenario to having an unarmed and
>defenceless Sirius at his feet. Killing here, would have been murder
>- in England we have no degrees of murder, just murder.


This is where I have a bit of a problem with the whole thing.  I would
say Harry was justified to kill Black that night.

Let me explain before I get hate mail.

To Harry's view, Black betrayed his parents to their death and was
coming after him.  Betrayal is a nasty affair.  So nasty that Dante
had the sin as the center of his Inferno.  The perpetrators were being
devoured in the very mouth of Satan.  Not a pretty picture.

Black also had just dragged Ron and broken his leg.  Also not very
good.  To Harry, Black could of been desiring to kill Ron too.  How
would Harry know otherwise?

Now in this case where Harry was far away from Black for a while and
then is told this man is trying to kill *him*, I think Harry was in a
position to be locked and loaded to kill.  It was in self-defense
really along with the revenge factor.

I do agree that revenge killing is pointless and a waste of life.
There is no satisfaction or peace in that act.  That being said, I
will move on.

So, from my opinion, Harry did have a type of "authorization" to kill
Black that night.  For his life.  For Ron's life.  For Hermione's
life.  For his parents' death.  All were in danger from Harry's
perspective.

Of course, now we know that perspective was wrong.  Kind of puts a
kink in my line of logic really.  To us now, Harry should not of
killed Black.   He should of done precisely what he did, conveniently
enough.  So I am at a passing as I said before.  I would of killed
Black if I was Harry, but I am glad he didn't.


Melody