Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
answering headscratchers
Changed line(s) 227 (click to see context) from:
to:
** If an auror or even a civilian wizard or witch find themselves in a situation where they really have to kill someone, there are plenty of ways to do it that don't require using a curse that's a huge taboo, illegal and very difficult to cast. The killing curse has the advantage of being quick and impossible to block but it's not the only magical way to kill someone.
Added DiffLines:
** It's possible that 'Dumbledore got over his issues, went to Germany, kicked Grindelwald's ass and single-handedly ended the war' is a major oversimplification of events. Trading cards meant for children aren't history books and Dumbledore never talked to Harry about what happened beyond saying that he put off confronting Grindelwald.
Added DiffLines:
** Neville slaying the snake, while incredibly awesome, has nothing to do with whether or not he's a powerful wizard. He did it with a sword.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 221 (click to see context) from:
** First: it's illegal, even in self-defense. It has been legalized under certain conditions for certain people (see [[http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Killing_curse#Legalisation here]]). Second: As Bellatrix says to Harry in Book five, you have to mean an Unforgivable. Just pointing a wand and saying the incantation does nothing if you haven't got some homicidal tendencies (Also see the 'Unforgivable' discussion above). That said, I agree, it would be [[IncrediblyLamePun dead useful]] in many self-defense situations. But I guess the protagonists in a 'young readers' book can't go running around killing people.
to:
** First: it's illegal, even in self-defense. It has been legalized under certain conditions for certain people (see [[http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Killing_curse#Legalisation here]]). Second: As Bellatrix says to Harry in Book five, you have to mean an Unforgivable. Just pointing a wand and saying the incantation does nothing if you haven't got some homicidal tendencies (Also see the 'Unforgivable' discussion above). That said, I agree, it would be [[IncrediblyLamePun [[{{Pun}} dead useful]] in many self-defense situations. But I guess the protagonists in a 'young readers' book can't go running around killing people.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The Killing Curse and the other Unforgivable Curses were demonstrated to students by using them on a spider, and no one took any issue with that. So it seems like it's just using the Curses on ''people'' that's illegal.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Not really. She wasn't just blinded; Fawkes completely pecked/clawed her eyes out. There was no risk in looking into her eyes, because there was nothing left to look into. The gaze of a dead basilisk (or one that was blinded through nerve damage rather than destruction of its eyes) could still possibly be lethal.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Considering the curse is illegal, and there are definitely better methods to incapacitate a rampaging animal like a lion (such as the Stunning Spell or Impediment Jinx), they most likely would get big legal trouble if found out.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[folder: Killing Curse against animals]]
* This might be a stupid question, but... What happens if a wizard uses the Killing Curse against a feral animal? For an example, consider a wizard taking his family on a vacation to Africa, only for the family to run into a starving lion. Would the wizard still be sent to Azkaban if he used Avada Kedavra to slay the animal before it can maul him or another member of his family?
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** I'd assume ''concentration'' is a factor here. Hogwarts and Diagon Alley both have much higher concentrations of wizards and magic than the whole of London or New York, when looking at it perspectively. Diagon Alley, for instance, is a small area inside London. Imagine it like a bath - London is the bath as a whole, Diagon Alley is the base, and magic is the water. The water could cover the whole of the bath base, but the vast majority of the bath is still 'empty'. Therefore, while there is magic in London or New York, it doesn't cover ''enough'' to cause any electrical interference.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 336 (click to see context) from:
*** Indeed, it would be entirely in character for Dumbledore to craft or enhance Moody's eye ''specifically'' to counter the Cloak, purely to ensure that a counter to its invisibility would be available if it fell into the wrong hands. He'd had the Cloak in his sole possession for long enough to have worked out and tested such a counterspell, and the Elder Wand to make it work.
to:
*** Indeed, it would be entirely in character for Dumbledore to craft or enhance Moody's eye ''specifically'' to counter see through the Cloak, invisibility cloak, purely to ensure that a counter to its invisibility means of detection would be available if it the Potter family's cloak ever fell into the wrong hands. He'd had the Cloak that cloak in his sole possession for long enough to have worked out and tested such a counterspell, counter-spell, and the Elder Wand to make it work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Indeed, it would be entirely in character for Dumbledore to craft or enhance Moody's eye ''specifically'' to counter the Cloak, purely to ensure that a counter to its invisibility would be available if it fell into the wrong hands. He'd had the Cloak in his sole possession for long enough to have worked out and tested such a counterspell, and the Elder Wand to make it work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 124,125 (click to see context) from:
** Also there's a facet of the Imperio curse that's often overlooked as is often seen as the "lesser" of the three or the least evil, but we see it in Fantastic Beast 2, and is that Imperio can be use for rape. You can use Imperio to force someone to be your sexaul partener, e.i. sex slave. So there you have it; murder, torture and rape, those are the three greatest crimes in RealLife, why would be different in the magic world?
to:
** Also there's a facet of the Imperio curse that's often overlooked as is often seen as the "lesser" of the three or the least evil, but we see it in Fantastic Beast 2, and is that Imperio can be use for rape. You can use Imperio to force someone to be your sexaul partener, sexuall partner, e.i. sex slave. So there you have it; murder, torture and rape, those are the three greatest crimes in RealLife, why would be different in the magic world?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 124 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Also there's a facet of the Imperio curse that's often overlooked as is often seen as the "lesser" of the three or the least evil, but we see it in Fantastic Beast 2, and is that Imperio can be use for rape. You can use Imperio to force someone to be your sexaul partener, e.i. sex slave. So there you have it; murder, torture and rape, those are the three greatest crimes in RealLife, why would be different in the magic world?
