Why the time turner stinks

[wildfire_517]

No: HPFGUIDX 79787

>Deirdre: 
> Presuming there isn't only one time turner 

Wyld:
  
  There's definitely more than one time turner.  There's a whole 
shelf of them in the MoM, as we see in OotP.
 
>Deirdre:
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and 
killed
> pre-powerful Voldemort?
(snips)
>So
> if it's ok to let Harry save himself from the dementor, surely it 
would be
> ok to turn back time when Voldy starts making his
> killing-you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves?

Wyld:

  Doing that would severely change history and, most likely, would 
violate the major precept of Time Turner use: Thou must not be seen.  
Harry was able to save himself because in "the past," when he saw 
himself, he thought he was seeing his father.  Therefore, he was 
never technically seen by anyone in "the past."  However, if someone 
went back in time to destroy LV, it's almost certain they would, at 
the very least, be seen...not to mention the huge change that would 
have on the history of the Wizarding World (and the Muggle World, for 
that matter!)  It's like the Ray Bradbury story about going back in 
time to hunt dinosaurs.  One tiny, insignificant change drastically 
changed the entire world.  Imagine what removing one of the most 
important figures in the world would do!

>Deirdre:
> The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner 
stinks.

Me again:

  Well, yes.  It almost seems like a plot point that wasn't thought 
all the way through when it was introduced.  It served its purpose 
and let us all hope that we never see it again.

  Wyld