Wizard/Muggle "Radar"

[huntergreen_3]

No: HPFGUIDX 108834

Janet wrote:
>>I believe it is possible that if her children were threatened by
Voldemort, she wouldn't stop to consider things like the fact that
Voldemort's word is worthless, that he's capable of kidnapping and
killing someone and *then* demanding ransom or information, or even
that "threatened men live long." She might just fold.<<

HunterGreen previously:
> Having a narrow and overprotective stance of your children doesn't
> necessarily make you stupid though. In that situation I think its
> more likely that she would freak out and demand that her children
> stay in order headquarters (or under the watchful eye of her,
> Arthur or a capable adult wizard) 24 hours a day. I think her
> paranoia is extreme enough that if she did make some sort of deal
> for her children's lives she'd worry herself to death about it not
> working out. I don't think she's capable of trusting something like
> that. 

SSSusan:
I guess it's all in how *rational* or *irrational* one takes Molly to
be. WOULD she be capable of stopping to consider? WOULD she think
ahead & decide to show her concern by imposing lock-down? Tough call.

HunterGreen:
Let me clarify -- I don't think rationality has that much to do with 
it. I think Molly is an hysteric, so if something like that were to 
happen she would react hysterically. I don't think she's capable of 
covert action because of that. So whether or not she would betray the 
order because of of the love she has for her children comes down to 
the situation. Perhaps if *she* were kidnapped, and was going to be 
killed if she didn't give up information (with a promise they'd go 
after her kids next), perhaps then I can see her betraying the order 
(although I'm not sure I'd call that a cut-and-dry betrayal). On the 
other hand, if a DE were to contact her privately or if the children 
were put into direct danger, I think she'd be more likely to freak 
out and go to Dumbledore or Arthur than to quietly make a deal with 
Voldemort's side.  


Janet:
>>The thing about Arthur is that he *does* see the big picture -- if
he didn't, he wouldn't still be poor and working in an office the
size of a broom closet, when he could improve his situation with a
little short-term schmoozing around the Ministry of Magic and
downplaying his pro-Muggle stance. He won't compromise, he won't
fold, and he knows what evil is capable of. (Why, yes, I do admire
Arthur. He reminds me of my own father.)<<


SSSusan:
>>I think Hunter & Janet are looking at two characters and
drawing two different pictures of them, seeing their motivations or
actions somewhat differently. The difficulty for me is that imo we
haven't seen ENOUGH of them--particularly of Arthur--for me to feel
100% confident in saying "he won't fold" or "she will fold" or "she
won't fold" or....

Hunter says Molly supports all Arthur's decisions and so she might be
able to see the bigger picture, too. I guess the question, though,
is *in the heat of the moment* when a child has been taken, would she
stop to consult Arthur & think about the bigger picture? I suspect
that Janet is arguing that NO, she would not. Hunter is saying YES,
she might well be able to. I'm saying, "She might not be able
to...but I'm not yet convinced that Arthur would be able to either."<<

HunterGreen:
Like I said, when it comes to the heat of the moment, it depends on 
the moment. She doesn't seem to be able to think clearly when she's 
upset, and I think her first instinct would be to go to someone for 
help, rather than make a deal on her own. Now if getting help was 
impossible, well, that's a different story.


SSSusan previously:
>>>Anyway, to your question. IS there any kind of "wizard detecting"
or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in witches & wizards? Not that
I'm aware of. But did I miss something in the books? Is this
something Aurors are capable of?<<<

Janet replied:
>>Well, there's one case where muggle detecting seems to occur:
when Harry does magic and gets nasty letters for it [snip] But I
don't know how they could tell, any more than I understand the entire
magic detection system that's in use with Harry.<<

HunterGreen previously:
> That seems to indicate there is some sort of magic 'radar', or
> perhaps wizards between the ages of 11 and 17 are 'flagged' somehow

SSSusan:
>>All I can say to this is YUCK. Seems awfully Big Brotherish to me.
Even if the Ministry has means of doing this, I still wonder whether
an *individual* would have the ability/mechanism/device necessary.<<

HunterGreen:
Yeah, I agree. Its odd how this fantasy world where people can do 
magic and there's so many things they have access to that muggles 
don't can sometimes look so ugly and unpleasant. Their government is 
deeply corrupt and has too much power, eye-witness accounts mean 
NOTHING to law-enforcement, and their prison is quite sadistic.

HunterGreen previously:
> As for wizards being able to tell a muggle from a wizard, there's
> nothing in the books indicating either way. Personally, I think
> that if a wizard disguised themself as a muggle and strolled up to
> another wizard calling themselves such, that the wizard would be
> able to tell. They might be able to 'sense' magical ability ....

SSSusan:
>>And I tend to think the opposite. Isn't it fun?? :-)<<

HunterGreen:
Eh, like I said, there's nothing to prove it either way in the books.