Weasley deaths

[psychodudeneo]

No: HPFGUIDX 53268

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "karenkyla3" <karenkyla3 at a...> 
wrote:
>
> In response to the question of plausibility - whether killing all 
or 
> most of the Weasleys to secure Ron's destiny is too farfetched, I 
> would say that while it is drastic, it's not unprecedented.  Think 
of 
> one of the more famous fictional sidekicks - Robin of 
Batman&Robin.  
> He's just a wholesome family boy until his entire family is killed 
> right in front of him.  While I can't think of any others offhand, 
> I'm sure other famous sidekicks have gotten their start in the same 
> way.  

ME (First post in a while):
I think the unlikelyhood lies in the number of Weasleys more than 
anything.  I could see two to three getting the axe, but killing 
every single one of them - including the ones that are scattered 
(like Bill, Charlie, and possibly the Twins at this point too) seems 
like a lot of trouble for Voldy or his cronies to go through for 
Potter's SIDEKICK.  Heck, at this point, I doubt Voldy even 
knows/remembers who Ron is, and just thinks of him as "that annoying 
redhaired kid Potter is always with".  If we see Ron doing something 
Harry-ish to Voldemort in the near future, than yeah, I could see the 
Death Eaters hunting them down.  Otherwise, I think that only a 
couple of Weasleys will go down in crossfire.

And you refrenced Batman and Robin, and other similar sidekicks.  The 
thing with most of the Robins is, they all happened to be only 
children.  It's easy to knock off two people.  Hunting down a small 
army of a family seems a tad unlikely and complicated.  Yeah yeah, 
Voldy did it before with the Potters.  But to suggest that Ron's 
lineage has the same importance/uniqueness or quality would diminish 
Harry's (not that Harry's special origins and talents couldn't use 
being took down a peg).

"psychodudeneo"