muggle baiting vs. muggle torture

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 155658

Gerry wrote:
> Hm, I don't think it has anything to do with the level of harm. I
would expect Muggle-baiting is using magic maliciously on Muggles
because they are Muggles. From the examples we get from canon
(shrinking keys, Willy Widdershin's toilets) quote often not even
specific Muggles but any Muggle will do. 
> 
> That is not what the twins did. Now I agree that it was wrong and
that it caused a lot of panic. But it was not muggle-baiting. Because
they did not do it to him because he was a Muggle. They would have
done exactly the same if he were a wizard. 
> 
> So yes, it is wrong, just as wrong as beating him up would be. But
no it is not muggle-baiting.


Carol responds:
Not to beat a dead horse, but why would the only motive for Muggle
baiting have to be "because the person is a Muggle"? Fred and George
use this point to excuse their actions, but it doesn't mean that they
weren't Muggle baiting. Dudley is a Muggle and they know it. He can't
do magic or defend himself against it. And they are unquestionably
*baiting* him (dropping the candy as bait that they know he'll take).

I think the argument that they didn't do it *because* he's a Muggle is
their attempt to get themselves off on a technicality.

Carol, who agrees with Gerry that their action was wrong whether or
not it's technically Muggle baiting