Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...)

[huntergreen_3]

No: HPFGUIDX 86013

K wrote:

>>...killing someone in a war *when they are fighting back* is
justified. Not just killing them if they are unarmed and not 
resisting. I said that killing Voldemort in a fight was fine but 
killing him in cold blood when he wasn't doing anything wasn't. <<

HunterGreen:
But Voldemort being 'unarmed and not resisting' and 'not doing 
anything' are two very different things (IMO, I can't really imagine 
a situation where Voldemort wouldn't be resisting). Unless Voldemort 
is unarmed / caged or unconscience, there really is not a time when 
he's not a threat to Harry. Even if Harry attacked him when his back 
is turned, what is he going to do the moment he turns around and sees 
Harry? I can understand your point, and it is definitely applicable 
in situations like the one with Sirius, Lupin & Peter-although Peter 
had done horrible things (at least to Sirius), it would have been 
very wrong to kill an unarmed man, especially since he was begging 
for his life. Voldemort is a *constant* threat to Harry, no matter if 
he's actively trying to kill Harry at that moment or not (as for 
other people in the WW going up and killing Voldemort, now that's a 
different matter-your argument definitely works there). 


K wrote:
>>I think it far more likely that Harry will try and sacrifice 
himself in some way to somehow 'save' Voldemort.<<

HunterGreen:
Although I doubt there is any way to 'save' VD, I agree that Harry 
won't just go out and kill him. There's been all this back-and-forth 
about whether Harry would be justified or morally right in killing 
VD, when it isn't that way to Harry. He *doesn't* want to be the one 
who kills Voldemort. No matter how many things VD has done to him 
(which is quite a bit more than just killing his parents, nearly 
*everything* bad in his life can be traced back to Voldemort), he is 
horrified by the thought, and I doubt will ever 'embrace it' in any 
way. That's exactly why he saved Peter, and why he tried crucio on 
Bellatrix as opposed to AK, he doesn't want to end anyone's life.

Kate wrote:
> > It's not like Voldemort can just be locked up or anything.  He 
can't
> > be put into jail and rehabilitated.  He's not just going to decide
> > one day that he doesn't want to try to rule the wizarding world
> > anymore.  It's just not going to happen.

K replied:
>> I understand the rehabilitation point - but why can't he be locked 
up somewhere?<<

HunterGreen:
Eventually he would get out. He has powers that are supposed to be 
matched only by DD, and by what we've seen of DD, he can be *very 
powerful* when he wants. I understand that Voldemort would be without 
his wand, but he's also very charming, and manipulative, and of 
course there's all that 'dark magic' that everyone thought Sirius 
used to get out (of course Sirius didn't use it, but that doesn't 
mean that it doens't exist). Of course the MoM would probably just 
have his soul sucked out, if the dementers were still available 
(which would be worse than anything Harry does to him), or have him 
put to death some other way, but I very much doubt that he wouldn't 
find some way to escape (or that one of his followers wouldn't break 
him out).


K:
 
>>If Harry abandons all sense of morality and kills someone in cold 
blood *anyone* then frankly I'd rather he *didn't* survive. <<

HunterGreen:
IMHO if Harry did that it would be such a break from his character 
that the journey to get him to that point would have killed most of 
him anyway, I doubt he'd be able to ride into the sunset after that.



-HunterGreen.