[HPforGrownups] Re: When is AK "necessary"?

[Sherry Garfio]

No: HPFGUIDX 45199

Sorry, I just sent this out under the wrong subject header...

Richard Thorp wrote:
> Someone else mentioned about Voldemort, and if he could be 
> AK'ed... I would guess that even if he could, the "good guys" 
> wouldn't do it, because it is stooping to Voldemorts level... 
> To draw a real world paralell it would be like decrying the 
> use of landmines, and then planting them yourself.

And Heidi replied:
> However, in GoF, Sirius points out that during Voldemort's first reign
> of terror, Mr Crouch obtained authorisation for aurors to use
> unforgivable curses. He also says that Moody didn't kill unless it was
> necessary. Of course, that implies that when it was necessary, Moody did
> kill Death Eaters (and possibly others as well). 
> 
> So where does that put the dividing line?

Crouch's policies reminded me strongly of McCarthyism, which I found very
disturbing.  He sees it as okay for the cops to break the rules, even their
most sacred rules, for the sake of stomping out Voldemort and his followers -
after all, desperate times call for desperate measures.

I would hope that Richard's assessment would hold true now that Crouch is gone
and Dumbledore & Co. are the major influence.  I seriously doubt Harry would
ever stoop that low (at least, I really really hope he doesn't because he's
such a good kid in spite of being a mentally abused orphan ;-).

Sherry


=====
"The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above-average drivers."

      -Dave Barry, "Things That It Took Me 50 Years to Learn"

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com