Dirty Harry / 'Good' Harry (WAS: The intended murder of Pettigrew and

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 116758



I, Del, wrote :
"Stealing : I can't remember him stealing, but I do remember that he
helped and supported Hermione when she stole the ingredients for the
Polyjuice potion from Snape's office. He had no remorse about it."

Alla replied :
"I don't think he should feel any remorse about it(or at least not 
much) That is the case of good intentions excusing formal breaking the
rules, IMO.

They were trying to catch the real Heir of Slytherin. If for that,
they stole ingredients from Snape's office, wich I doubt that Snape
would have given them,even if they asked nicely, it is very excusable
in my book."

Del replies :
Stealing is not only against the school rules, but also against the
law. This was no mere "formal breaking of the rules".

I know they had good intentions, but this in itself does not excuse
the theft. Moreover, if good intentions are all that matter, then I
don't see what the big fuss is with Harry having to kill or be killed.
Harry has a good intention in wanting to rid the world of LV and
preserving his own life, so why should the idea of killing LV bother
Harry ?

As for Snape, he wouldn't have given them the ingredients even if they
had asked nicely, because those were ingredients second-year students
were not supposed to manipulate or even have, which is why they had to
steal them to start with.

I know that the Trio was working for the good, but that is not a
cover-all excuse. Similarly, the fact that they were fighting LV and
trying to catch his Death-Eaters was not a good cover-all excuse to
allow the Aurors to use the Unforgivable Curses, as all the good guys
acknowledged.

Del