Bang! You're Dead.

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 86323

> > Carol again:
> >In GoF, Harry can't bring himself to use
> > Avada Kedavra against Sirius, despite his rage, or
> > against Peter Pettigrew, despite his cold contempt. He
> > also persuades Lupin and Sirius not to use it, not to
> > become killers. He knows, through reason or instinct,
> > that they would be contaminating themselves by doing so.
>
Arcum: 
> In GoF, Harry has no reason to AK Sirius, and little
> opportunity to AK Peter. If you mean in PoA, Harry hadn't
> heard of Avada Kedavra yet...

Carol:
Sorry. PoA, of course. <blush> He *does* want to kill Sirius and
spends quite a bit of time contemplating it. (How he would have done
it without having yet heard of AK, I don't know, but he wasn't
contemplating HOW to do it. He simply could not bring himself to
commit murder). And I didn't say that he intended to AK Peter in Gof
(meaning PoA!); I said that he *persuaded* Lupin and Sirius not to do
it, creating a life debt that Peter now owes him and preventing them
from becoming murderers.
> 
> > Kneasy: 
> > > I'm pleased that you have no objection to Voldy being
> > > smeared across the landscape; just the method used
> > > causes you concern. Why? Dead is dead. 
> > 
> > Carol again: No. Dead isn't dead and killing isn't
> > killing. There's self-defense and there's murder. There
> > are legitimate and illegitimate methods. Unless Harry is
> > made an honorary auror exempt from the laws of the WW or
> > the law is changed in time of war, he should not break
> > it. And the moral law still applies: the curses are
> > unforgiveable. Why should he be forgiven for using them
> > if no one else (except an auror when Crouch was in
> > charge) can be forgiven for using one? 
>
Arcum: 
> While I think they'd probably wave the charges if Tom was
> killed by AK, I feel it is more a matter of not stooping to
> their level. A bit of dialogue I recall from PS/SS:
> 
> "You flatter me," said Dumbledore calmly. "Voldemort had
> powers I will never have."
> 
> "Only because you're too -- well -- noble to use them."
> 
> I feel this would cover the unforgivables as well. <snip>

Carol:
I'm not sure about waiving the charges, but otherwise I agree with
you. Dumbledore doesn't use the unforgiveable curses because he
doesn't need them and because he's "the epitome of goodness." That's
the standard of behavior we can expect Harry to follow. Good is more
powerful than Evil and neither must nor should use evil methods to
achieve its goals. (Barty Crouch Sr. may have been good to begin with,
but he became tainted the moment he began to fight evil with evil.)

 
> > Carol again: I can see your point here and I've revised
> > my theory (above) to include cold indifference regarding
> > the AK. But the other two, especially Crucio, are
> > probably never justified in JKR's view. There are plenty
> > of other spells available to hinder an opponent, notably
> > shield charms, Expelliarmus and Stubefy (correctly
> > pronounced). I wouldn't mind seeing Harry hit LV with a
> > combination of Expelliarmus and Tarantellegra (if Harry's
> > wand will work against its brother). But Crucio is
> > another matter altogether.
> 
> I'd like to point out that we have no canon of Moody having
> used the unforgivable curses as of yet. While he didn't
> manage to bring in all the DE's he fought alive, there are
> many other ways he could have killed them. Keep in mind
> that none of the unforgivables in GoF were done by Moody.
> And I do think most of the Aurors using unforgivables were
> bad ones. Keep in mind it wasn't limited to AK'ing. They
> could also use Crucio and Imperio.

Carol:
You're right. I was assuming that he killed Rosier (who attacked him
first and blew off part of his nose) using AK because it's the only
killing spell I know of. Maybe there are other spells that can kill
but are not illegal or unforgiveable because there are ways to defend
against them, whereas AK can't be blocked unless you happen to be HP
or Dumbledore. I'm not forgetting Crucio and Imperio, which (as I
staed in another post) provided a clue to Imposter!Moody's evil nature
that we shouldn't have missed. I very much doubt that the real Moody
would use them--or need to do so. Again we have the quote stating that
he brought them in alive when he could--a matter of principle,
presumably--and killed only when it was necessary. We know that he
killed Rosier. IIRC, we don't know who killed Wilkes. We also don't
know *how* they were killed.

Arcum: 
> Also, I don't really think the whole bit with Bella was a
> red herring. What she said seemed both consistant with what
> Crouch has said about the unforgivables, AK in particular:
> 
> "Avada Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic
> behind it - you could all get your wands out now and point
> them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much
> as a nosebleed."

Carol:
I don't think it's a red herring, either. I was merely conceding
Kneasy's point that it *might* be one. I think you're right that the
quote from Imposter!Moody (as distinct from Crouch, which I use to
refer to his father) does more or less confirm Bellatrix's words, with
one key difference: she states that it requires a desire to kill; he
states that it requires very powerful magic. For both of those
reasons, Harry's Cruciatus spell didn't work--fortunately for his
conscience and his "good guy" status.

Arcum: 
> On another note, why does most of the information thus far
> about unforgivables come from DEs?

Carol:
I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean that it comes from DEs because
only DEs use those spells, you're probably right. But other than
Imposter!Moody and Bellatrix, who has provided us with information on
them? I haven't yet checked out the quotes. (I'm frankly relieved by
the idea that the real Mad Eye may have had some other way to kill
Rosier. If so, then the Good side has no sufficient reason to resort
to the unforgiveable curses, and there's no need for Harry or the DA
or the Order to contaminate themselves by using them. That, to me, is
extremely important in maintaining the distinction between good and
evil as JKR has defined them.
 
> > Carol:
> > Has anyone hunted up all the references in the books
> > to the Unforgiveable Curses? Who's used them and in what
> > circumstances and why they're unforgiveable? That's what
> > I really need to explore before I take this discussion
> > any further. C.
>
Arcum: 
<snip>
> Chapter 14 of GoF - "The Unforgivable Curses" has the most
> information. 
> Chapter 27 of GoF has Sirius's info on their use by Aurors. 
> Chapter 36 of OoP is where the infamous taunt by Bella is.

Carol:
Thanks. I'll print this list for future reference. If anyone finds
more info on the curses (not examples of people casting them), please
let me know.

Arcum:
> Umbridge didn't end up Crucioing Harry, but threatened him
> with it, and started to cast it.

Carol:
Which shows that right away that she's evil. Unlike Harry, who was in
a state of great agitation when he tried and failed to Crucio Bella,
she was perfectly calm in choosing to use an illegal and unethical
spell--not to mention hypocritical since she was trying to ban
defensive spells and potions that could be used in war. I wonder if
her magic (and her malice) would have been strong enough to make it
work. She seems like a feeble excuse for a witch, but there's no
question of her cruelty (making Harry write his lines in his own
blood). Anyone think she's secretly a DE or in league with them?
(Arcum, do you have that page reference?)
<snip>
>
Arcum: 
> Krum cast Crucio while under Imperius. (which is
> interesting, actually...)

Carol:
Yes. Very interesting. Viktor Krum seems like a basically decent
person, but he hasn't been taught to resist the Imperius curse despite
having a DE as headmaster (Karkaroff, in my view, is still a DE rather
than a former DE like Snape. He's a coward and a traitor but he still
teaches his students the Dark Arts.) I'm worried about Krum; he may
turn out to be a tool of the bad guys if he's so easily manipulated. 

Carol, who firmly believes that the unforgiveable curses should not be
used by the good guys