the "Why didn't they just shoot Voldemort?" thread

[Rylingo]

Yeah, but WHICH spells can you cast without saying incantations?

They never actually say. I would assume all of them.

If you can do this for all spells then why is it not done for all spells?

Using words and wands help focus the spells. Those with poor self-control over their minds or active imaginations, like Harry struggle. Hermione is the only one the kids able to use nonverbal spells easily. It tends to be only used by more powerful witches and wizards. The spells have the possibility of backfiring should they be performed wrong.

And where in the books HAVE you actually seen a spell cast against an individual (not an area) over several miles? Many times throughout the series the protagonists or enemies are very far away and spells are not cast but rather a pursuit begins.

Spells like the post sending spells(in the ministry) work over long distances. In book 1 Snape and Quirrel were struggling to control Harry's broom from a distance. Control of an object from, say half a football pitches length away is shown.
Attacking from distance? Estimating that would be speculation on my part really (hence "probably" in my last post).

Are Wizards now by some unwritten rule also superhuman in their mental capacity to identify a bullet speeding through the air at 2'500 kilometres per hour and then deploy a spell against it? Also their dexterity to aim that their wands don't need aiming sights?

I don't think anyone is doubting the speed of bullets Treblaine. Its everything that comes before the bullet is fired. The risk of being caught out by legilimens. The chances of Voldey just chilling out in clear view of snipers who somehow have learned his position beforehand. Voldermourts spies would know that the Ministry of Magic is in cahoots with government. Voldermourt could then simply stay away from plottable areas.

And even should the bullet strike it isn't necessarily a killshot. Unless it's an extremely large bullet directly to the head. And should you kill voldermourt this way, yes it would inconvenience him a lot but he could regain a new body.

As for the aiming thing, I don't think the wizards are going to hold straight up shoot offs against snipers. It would be tactical suicide. I would add that spells are wider than bullets which would help with range. The size, shape and speed of spell seems to vary based on the type.

Wizard teleportation is rare and the commonly available magic is only from point to point as Weaselys' Diagon-Ally glitch. Why is it Wizards use other forms of transport if teleportation really was as easy and common as you describe?

Because its an easy spell to cock up. It is considered dangerous to use in crowded areas incase you teleport into someone, killing them. If you mess up the spell yourself you risk the danger of ripping yourself in half.

PS: if Wizard did teleport to the moon and use a Bubblehead charm (that I assume contains the air molecules around their head) their chest would explode from the necessary air pressure in their lungs. If the bubble was extended around their body even then they would be screwed as their body and this small pocket of air would soon freeze to 3-degrees above absolute zero. So cold that the nitrogen in their air around them would turn to liquid.

Yeah, you got the bubble head charm right. It does seem to reduce the effect of pressure as well. The bubblehead charm does, have an obvious time limit due to its nature. The Flagration charm can create heat but I'd say itd be difficult to use without damaging the bubblehead charm. The bluebell flame charm (used commonly by Hermione) can burn with no fuel creating heat to for anything above it (yet not to its sides at all). Could work if you placed stayed on a broom and floated over it creating flames as you go. Gonna be difficult though.

And if that doesn't get them the solar radiation will. Even if protected from all that This bubble they'd soon suffocate as the CO2 they exhale would quickly build up... it would be like putting a plastic bag over your head, you'd die quickly. See you actually have to STOP AND THINK rather than just say "hurr, magic solves it". You'd have to cast a dozen different spells, OR you could wear one space suit designed for the job.

The radiation could be tricky. Im not sure how easily you could keep it off.

So you could spend months training to cast the correct spells. Or you could spend years training to be an astronaut?

 

[SnakeoilSage]

*Snip*

M'kay. Well if you ever get tired of hating someone else's work because they don't cater to your personal opinions on, well, everything, feel free to do better on your own. But make haste: the world awaits with baited breath.

 

[Singularly Datarific]

As much as I hate the south, they'd do a damn better job of killing Voldy than Harry did...

 

[TheUsername0131]

Its a fantasy world. Guns don't exist in that world.

Find me one reference in the books to the existence of guns and I'll take back what I said.

"But its based on our world!"

Ok, let me know where the flying dragons are in our world.

Btw his snake had a constant protective shell around it. I can't imagine why he can't do the same for himself.

In the Prisoner of Azkaban book, excerpt from the Daily Prophet article: BLACK STILL AT LARGE

?Muggles have been told that Black is carrying a gun (a kind of metal wand that Muggles use to kill each other)??




Voldemort died on the 2nd of May, 1998 (aged 71)
He?s been dead for over fourteen years, should we really still be arguing about it?

 

[Treblaine]

If you want the wiki version there is Pottermore the official interactive site run by JKR and Sony which is soon to open to the public. Its not just a lexicon of things in the books its also behind the scenes look at how the books were made and the creative process behind that including scrapped chapters, interactive games, etc?. Though when the books themselves arent due to change in content and all of the films are out a hard copy book can also be good. I dont see it as a cop out though as behind the scenes documentaries or biographies are seen as full products so why cant this book?

Harry hasnt interacted with the wizard internet thing because he is in class/fighting evil wizards/hitchhiking around Britain and when not doing that hes in a muggle household with less than basic rights.

Not once did you use the word encyclopaedia, thought Rowling continues to. Any book she writes summarising Harry Potter lore is worthless as it cannot be bound to canon, she could release a new book that contradicts anything in there. Wiki summarises the lore as described in books and how that is relevant to the film adaptations.

How could you do a "behind the scenes documentary" of writing a book? Best you can do is an extended series of interviews, that's broadcast TV or Youtube streaming kind of deal, not some boxed and priced product. Behind the scenes of films are DVD extras, not products in themselves. Interactive games are a side show, should be free on websites or cheap as chips on app-store.

PS: this wizard equivalent of the internet is clearly no equivalent as it is so rare, obscure and inaccessible. That defies the internet's purpose and function, it is NOT an elite network of limited subject matter. They could have used the internet to help a lot in Harry Potter, but they didn't, probably reflecting the author's prejudices on technology's worth.

 

[malestrithe]

Cracked.com made the similar point a while back. No amount of magic is going to stop a series of tactical nukes from landing. I'm fairly certain that he can only stop one or two, but not all of them.

 

[Treblaine]

Yeah, but WHICH spells can you cast without saying incantations?

They never actually say. I would assume all of them.

If you can do this for all spells then why is it not done for all spells?

Using words and wands help focus the spells. Those with poor self-control over their minds or active imaginations, like Harry struggle. Hermione is the only one the kids able to use nonverbal spells easily. It tends to be only used by more powerful witches and wizards. The spells have the possibility of backfiring should they be performed wrong.

And where in the books HAVE you actually seen a spell cast against an individual (not an area) over several miles? Many times throughout the series the protagonists or enemies are very far away and spells are not cast but rather a pursuit begins.

Spells like the post sending spells(in the ministry) work over long distances. In book 1 Snape and Quirrel were struggling to control Harry's broom from a distance. Control of an object from, say half a football pitches length away is shown.
Attacking from distance? Estimating that would be speculation on my part really (hence "probably" in my last post).

Are Wizards now by some unwritten rule also superhuman in their mental capacity to identify a bullet speeding through the air at 2'500 kilometres per hour and then deploy a spell against it? Also their dexterity to aim that their wands don't need aiming sights?

I don't think anyone is doubting the speed of bullets Treblaine. Its everything that comes before the bullet is fired. The risk of being caught out by legilimens. The chances of Voldey just chilling out in clear view of snipers who somehow have learned his position beforehand. Voldermourts spies would know that the Ministry of Magic is in cahoots with government. Voldermourt could then simply stay away from plottable areas.

And even should the bullet strike it isn't necessarily a killshot. Unless it's an extremely large bullet directly to the head. And should you kill voldermourt this way, yes it would inconvenience him a lot but he could regain a new body.

As for the aiming thing, I don't think the wizards are going to hold straight up shoot offs against snipers. It would be tactical suicide. I would add that spells are wider than bullets which would help with range. The size, shape and speed of spell seems to vary based on the type.

Wizard teleportation is rare and the commonly available magic is only from point to point as Weaselys' Diagon-Ally glitch. Why is it Wizards use other forms of transport if teleportation really was as easy and common as you describe?

Because its an easy spell to cock up. It is considered dangerous to use in crowded areas incase you teleport into someone, killing them. If you mess up the spell yourself you risk the danger of ripping yourself in half.

PS: if Wizard did teleport to the moon and use a Bubblehead charm (that I assume contains the air molecules around their head) their chest would explode from the necessary air pressure in their lungs. If the bubble was extended around their body even then they would be screwed as their body and this small pocket of air would soon freeze to 3-degrees above absolute zero. So cold that the nitrogen in their air around them would turn to liquid.

Yeah, you got the bubble head charm right. It does seem to reduce the effect of pressure as well. The bubblehead charm does, have an obvious time limit due to its nature. The Flagration charm can create heat but I'd say itd be difficult to use without damaging the bubblehead charm. The bluebell flame charm (used commonly by Hermione) can burn with no fuel creating heat to for anything above it (yet not to its sides at all). Could work if you placed stayed on a broom and floated over it creating flames as you go. Gonna be difficult though.

And if that doesn't get them the solar radiation will. Even if protected from all that This bubble they'd soon suffocate as the CO2 they exhale would quickly build up... it would be like putting a plastic bag over your head, you'd die quickly. See you actually have to STOP AND THINK rather than just say "hurr, magic solves it". You'd have to cast a dozen different spells, OR you could wear one space suit designed for the job.

The radiation could be tricky. Im not sure how easily you could keep it off.

So you could spend months training to cast the correct spells. Or you could spend years training to be an astronaut?

Then why does even Voldemort verbalise every spell he casts? And are you saying a non-verbal spell requires concentration and if disturbed or distracted it may not work or "backfire"? How would a "repell bullets" spell backfire? Suck the bullets into his cranium? This is hugely impractical, it's easy to aim a gun. You can drop a baker's dozen of JDAMs from 60'000 feet and realise Voldemort probably doesn't even realise what this technology is.

Those examples aren't casting a spell, that is magic controlling some other magic. Something specifically designed to be receptive. What about casting a killing spell over hundreds of feet, which is some zappy something that kills people bloodlessly. Voldemort obviously couldn't do that as when outside the besieged Hogwarts he didn't cast the Killing curse over that distance. You know what is looking a hell of a lot more effective than this killing curse:

Snipers are VERY GOOD at their work. They have managed to get kill shots even on the best military commanders who know all about guns and the danger of snipers. You CANNOT tell where a silenced sniper is shooting from, not without muggle bullet-path direction finding technology. You know how the US Military clears out snipers in their various wars: with their OWN snipers! Of all the powers of flame-throwers, bombs and tanks the best and sniper mother is another sniper. Lying stealthily and scanning with a magnifying scope.

"And even should the bullet strike it isn't necessarily a killshot. Unless it's an extremely large bullet directly to the head. And should you kill voldermourt this way, yes it would inconvenience him a lot but he could regain a new body."

And don't doubt the power of a .308 hollow point to the centre mass, it'll blow a hole the size of a bowling ball and the shockwave through the body will be like as if every inch of their flesh has been hit by Mike Tyson's strongest punch all at the same moment. It will deliver a fatal blow and even if it doesn't kill instantly you'll be utterly disoriented by the shock of the impact, your ribs flying apart and slamming back together.

It took Voldemort well over a decade to regenerate last time. Plenty of track down the last Horcruxes and get his gang on the run. This "mere inconvenience" is worth it. The SAS could get this shit sorted out VERY quickly. They've deal with worse guys than Voldemort on weekend operations.

As the the space survival thing if you put a complete idiot in a spacesuit on the moon, they'll live. It's far easier to just wear a suit than manage half a dozen conflicting spells. I'm not sure Wizards seem to be even aware of ionising radiation nor even the concept of the electromagnetic spectrum. Rowling has created a "wonderful whimsical world" that seems to be permanently set in the dark ages of pre-enlightenment claptrap. Harry is never taught about evolution nor so many of the other fundamental aspects of our world.

"Because (teleportation) is an easy spell to cock up. It is considered dangerous to use in crowded areas incase you teleport into someone, killing them. If you mess up the spell yourself you risk the danger of ripping yourself in half."

Whereas aircraft is statistically the safest way to travel and practical en mass. Yet Wizards are too bloody proud to use muggle technology... is Voldemort REALLY such an elitist extremist relative to this community? Or is he tilling RIPE ground of prejudice with the luddite wizarding community? Even the Weasleys.

There is also the cases where Wizarding World's magical powers could save MILLIONS of muggle lives with ease, yet they don't. Jerks.

And we could solve their problems, if they'd let us.

 

[ChickNaney]

This all reminds me of a book that I once read.

Spoiler

This guy was chasing this other guy through different dimensions and worlds using an item that's personal and different for each person, and every time they did, they screwed up the natural laws of each dimension. Well, they go through about 5 dimensions, switch every natural order in each of those dimensions, and finally find the guy that's been screwing everything up. The end is a big showdown that the whole book has been building up to between the main baddie and the main good guy, everyone else is counting on him, oooo, tension, you know how it is. They're on the battlefield, staring each other down, and how does the fight go?

The main good guy takes his special item (a heavy metal box, about the size of his fist, a little bigger) and throws it at the baddie's head, killing him on impact, effectively ending the chaos and destruction across multiple realms of existence by chucking a heavy object.

But, yeah, I haven't really seen very many books that have the main character take a step back and say, "wait a minute, hold on. Why don't we use common sense and make this easy?"

 

[Saulkar]

First is that, for whatever reason, the various mechanical and chemical processes that go into firing a gun don't quite take in high-magic areas, so it doesn't work for whatever reason.

Where has this been mentioned ever? I have no recollection of anybody explaining it in the Harry Potter's universe. In Harry Dresden's universe, however that is true. But that is a different one.

I'm making a conjecture as to what sort of reason might be given by someone defending that point, I'm not necessarily endorsing it. I'm pretty sure they've mentioned Muggle Tech as not functioning around magic, but I'm pretty sure that was limited to electronics. That said, it's not a far stretch to imagine that a volatile and unstable force that distorts the otherwise known laws of physics might, you know, distort the laws of physics.

But again, I'm just throwing conjecture as to what someone might say the reason was - and frankly, even if that was the case, I don't see how they could say something like a crossbow wouldn't work. That, and if the chemical processes that go into firing a gun would malfunction, the chemical processes that the human body constantly undergoes would definitely malfunction - Muggles would be exploding left and right.

In other words, you made that up. If it's not mentioned, nor hinted at, I could even say that bullets would be instantly fatal to wizards because MAGIC.

Also, other people have pointed out - electronics don't work around lots of wizards, not wizards in general. And that's is if we assume it's magic that screws them up. I can't remember at the moment, and I don't have the books to reference, but I don't think it was well explained why the whatever device that didn't work in Hogwards (was it a camera?), didn't work in Hogwards. It could have been a spell that prevented electronics from functioning.

At any rate, I keep mentioning that there are more tools than guns that could have been useful. None of them are used.

It was in the fourth book where Harry mentions to Ron and Hermione that he saw Draco crouched outside talking to his cupped hands and that he thinks it was a bug. Confusing Ron he explains it to him only for Hermione to counter that electronics do not work around Hogwarts due to its uniquely high concentrations of magic surrounding it. Also in another comment you mention that the sonic boom a bullet produces would give someone some warning which is impossible since the sound moves slower than the bullet but then you implied you know that, that has me confused.

Also to support you, it was never, ever mentioned that mechanical devices like guns and the such would never work around high concentrations of magic. Just so you can tell others that. I have a somewhat photographic/eidetic memory (do not know which one applies to books) when it comes to books and can assert with absolute confidence that it is never said that mechanical, non-electronic devices will not work around magic.

 

[Treblaine]

*Snip*

M'kay. Well if you ever get tired of hating someone else's work because they don't cater to your personal opinions on, well, everything, feel free to do better on your own. But make haste: the world awaits with baited breath.

Oh, suddenly this is all personal? After I made VERY CLEAR that this is NOT personal with how I outline how Rowling is screwing with young people's minds, leaving them open to exploitation by charlatans such as Creationists who are all to happy to foist magical origins of the universe?

No no no no. You can't turn this around that easy. I'm saying that reading Harry Potter makes people stupid, in the sense they are conditioned to see magical, un-testable and unpredictable solutions to real world problems and that science can be discarded when convenient. That's not my personal problem, that's a problem for all society. Magic should be for very small children who can't comprehend the whole world in all it's complexity. It's easier to explain the Tooth Fairy than dental development.

Kids over 11 shouldn't read Harry Potter. At least not without a very critical perspective of how the writing is unreasonably contrived in use of arbitrary magical solutions.

And yeah I AM going to call out Rowling on this Dumbledore stunt, she WAS exploitative. She DID benefit from free press and praise for progressing gay acceptance then completely failed to deliver, killing off Dumbledore with no mention to him having any kind of lover, gay or straight. She wants it both ways, and that's intellectually dishonest. She can still sell her books in countries which are hugely prejudicial against gays as it mentions no gay character... yet reaps the rewards of being progressive only by declaration.

I've got other stupidity-inducing and exploitative works to cover but they aren't exactly relevant:

The Da Vinci Code, the central plot element being that "the Christian world will be torn apart by proof that the New Testament is not PRECISELY true" Oh give me a FUCKING BREAK! Acting as if there has NEVER been any evidence to contradict the Bible's infallibility? And they're just looking for a freaking document about Jesus whose life was very poorly documented if he even existed at all. Creationists have been shit talking about evolutions for over a century and it's reached a fever pitch now, so much of the bible is absolute nonsense as demonstrated by science, Dan Brown paints such a false picture of religion's place in the world.

And Angels and Demons, the idea that the "deep dark secret" of the Catholic Church was the pope jacked off in a test tube for artificial insemination... how about how the Catholic Church - including the current pope - directly, deliberately and repeatedly covered up horrific sex crimes committed by their priests? And did so for decades, intimidating the victims to silence and even allowing the priests to go on victimising? It's like setting a film in 1945 Germany and the dark secret of Nazis is not that they've been gassing millions of people but that Hitler had an affair with a Jewish woman.

This is not my personal taste getting in the way. My personal taste dislikes Justin Beiber, but really he doesn't distort any fundamental perceptions of reality or impede free thought nor exploit people's confidence like I've listed above so I don't have any more to say about him and have never joined in on the Bieber hate.

No more about Dan Brown as really he doesn't have anything to do with this thread. But Harry Potter and JK Rowling DO. And I'll say what negative influence they have, rightly and relevantly.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

4. NO! I freaking hate this response, because all it is trying to cover up how poor the story really is. Hey, I get a kick out the series, but this is a glaring serious plot hole. The whole reason the stakes are high is because the magic world assumes that unless Harry stops volde the muggles wouldn't stand a chance... Truth of the matter is, and JK Rowling said so herself, that in a straight up war with the magical realm the muggles would win. We have vastly superior technology and armor, not to mention numbers.

You do realize that that applies to nearly all fiction? That's why its fiction... it punches gritty reality and extreme logic in the balls and makes entertaining shit up. If you don't like it, avoid any kind of fantasy like the plague, for your sake.

Dude, good writing doesn't insult your intelligence. Asking why they didn't shoot Voldemort is a legitment question that is never really properly explained... something that could of been done away with...

Then harry thought allowed "Why don't we just shoot him?" he continued "We'll go back to london, haggle with some gangs or whatever, get ourselves a contemporary weapon that voldemort probably hasn't seen in twenty year and just shoot him in the head when he's not looking. Even if he resurrects it'll by us valuable time!"

Hermione spoke up "We can't, Harry, because Voldemort [Explanation Here]"

"Whats a gun?" Asked Ron, innocently

Just a simple lampshading moment.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

*Snip*

M'kay. Well if you ever get tired of hating someone else's work because they don't cater to your personal opinions on, well, everything, feel free to do better on your own. But make haste: the world awaits with baited breath.

Oh, suddenly this is all personal? After I made VERY CLEAR that this is NOT personal with how I outline how Rowling is screwing with young people's minds, leaving them open to exploitation by charlatans such as Creationists who are all to happy to foist magical origins of the universe?

No no no no. You can't turn this around that easy. I'm saying that reading Harry Potter makes people stupid, in the sense they are conditioned to see magical, un-testable and unpredictable solutions to real world problems and that science can be discarded when convenient. That's not my personal problem, that's a problem for all society. Magic should be for very small children who can't comprehend the whole world in all it's complexity. It's easier to explain the Tooth Fairy than dental development.

Kids over 11 shouldn't read Harry Potter. At least not without a very critical perspective of how the writing is unreasonably contrived in use of arbitrary magical solutions.

And yeah I AM going to call out Rowling on this Dumbledore stunt, she WAS exploitative. She DID benefit from free press and praise for progressing gay acceptance then completely failed to deliver, killing off Dumbledore with no mention to him having any kind of lover, gay or straight. She wants it both ways, and that's intellectually dishonest. She can still sell her books in countries which are hugely prejudicial against gays as it mentions no gay character... yet reaps the rewards of being progressive only by declaration.

I've got other stupidity-inducing and exploitative works to cover but they aren't exactly relevant:

The Da Vinci Code, the central plot element being that "the Christian world will be torn apart by proof that the New Testament is not PRECISELY true" Oh give me a FUCKING BREAK! Acting as if there has NEVER been any evidence to contradict the Bible's infallibility? And they're just looking for a freaking document about Jesus whose life was very poorly documented if he even existed at all. Creationists have been shit talking about evolutions for over a century and it's reached a fever pitch now, so much of the bible is absolute nonsense as demonstrated by science, Dan Brown paints such a false picture of religion's place in the world.

And Angels and Demons, the idea that the "deep dark secret" of the Catholic Church was the pope jacked off in a test tube for artificial insemination... how about how the Catholic Church - including the current pope - directly, deliberately and repeatedly covered up horrific sex crimes committed by their priests? And did so for decades, intimidating the victims to silence and even allowing the priests to go on victimising? It's like setting a film in 1945 Germany and the dark secret of Nazis is not that they've been gassing millions of people but that Hitler had an affair with a Jewish woman.

This is not my personal taste getting in the way. My personal taste dislikes Justin Beiber, but really he doesn't distort any fundamental perceptions of reality or impede free thought nor exploit people's confidence like I've listed above so I don't have any more to say about him and have never joined in on the Bieber hate.

No more about Dan Brown as really he doesn't have anything to do with this thread. But Harry Potter and JK Rowling DO. And I'll say what negative influence they have, rightly and relevantly.

On this, I'll disagree. She created a universe, she's the "God" of that universe. If she says Dumbledore likes the cock, then Dumbledore always liked the cock. Is it exploitative? No. Because now you can go back and anytime Dumbledore says "This is my old friend" you know that is code for he took it in the ass.

Plus your argument nullifys my evidence that she said decoratively that the muggles would win the war.

 

[acturisme]

Are you suggesting there was or should have been a magic bullet?
Then there would have had to have been a magic Warren Commission and then a
magic conspiracy theory etc. ad infinitum.

 

[TheUsername0131]

So you could spend months training to cast the correct spells. Or you could spend years training to be an astronaut?

The distance between the earth and the moon varies from 356400 km to 406700 km.
If inter-continental Apparation is cautioned against, then travel to the moon by that method is arbitrarily ill-advised.

 

[TheUsername0131]

You do realize that that applies to nearly all fiction? That's why its fiction... it punches gritty reality and extreme logic in the balls and makes entertaining shit up. If you don't like it, avoid any kind of fantasy like the plague, for your sake.

"We don't ask that you stay within the bounds of physics, but at least follow the rules you freaking made up."
-CRACKED, 8 Classic Movies That Got Away With Gaping Plot Holes




Even with fiction working against the/our natural order of things; it follows its own rules, the ones the writer made up, the one's the writer maintains or unveils new elements into the plot; and the one's they forget out of forgetfulness or carelessness.


There is a distinction between fantasy and the literacy conventions it follows and the hypothetical (vulgar) analogy you devised.


Fiction does not follow our principles that govern concepts like probability, theirs is the rules of drama, they are the rules of literature and the foundational forces of criticism and canon.


Or it is hand-waved with Techno and Magi Babble, that gives no regard to prior events that are antithetical to semblance with internally consistent explanation; because everyone knows that Math and Logic are for losers. Reasonable expectations that respect an audiences intelligence is wicked. Shame on the audience not letting the fantasy (as you put it) "makes entertaining shit up."


If there is something an audience does not like, as conjugated from your response; then they have no right to criticism or discuss it analytically. That (as you put it) "any kind of fantasy" must be avoided "like the plague."


Logic isn't about suppressing fantasy, it is about dispelling delusion.




[This was not written as antagonistic, but in opposition to the shallow, vulgar and naive perspective presented that undermines the integrity of the thread. This is in no way an attack on your character but a proposed counterpart to the unfortunate implications and themes established by your post.]

 

[TheUsername0131]

I came to this thread with a well vested opinion, that opinion has changed as the arguments put forth where more reasonable then my own.


The possibility of being killed by non-magical means from a distance:

*The obscuring and befuddling nature of the concealing and perception distorting magics would make it difficult.

*That Voldemort is not hanging around as an available target.

*Others proposed that he has defenses, others argue that he might not have devised all inclusive defenses, and debating his reaction time.

(Considering how outwardly changed he is from recognizable as entirely human whether his reaction time would remain so.)

*The finer points of the ritualistic formulaic methods of evoking spells. Questioning the practicality and utility of wand lore.


At first I was confident that he was vulnerable, but now I feel uncertain and that he is a formidable force with arbitrarily effortless: tactical weaponry, remote handling and magical apportion, and other methods and resources at his disposal.

Even arguments over Magical Britain's apparent disinterest and general ignorance too what they perceive as Muggle substitutes for their lack of magic. Then arguments that he would be familiar with such utility and if he perceived the Muggles as an immediate threat, then he would perform mind control on the world leaders.

Even debates whether he would be able by means of Legilimens be able to detect the killer intent of a sniper, etc. (I am in no way demeaning or diminishing the capabilities and skills of trained personal, but the guy no longer look entirely human, we would not be certain a bullet would work on him or too how extensive the possible injury can be to him.)


As mentioned before, I came to this thread with a well vested opinion, that opinion has been changed as the arguments put forth where more reasonable then my own.

 

[Zenino]

also id like to add, they can all apparate/teleport, why cant they just be like the 'jumper' movie. Using multiple teleports realy fast, this power alone could give serious advantages in combat, while shooting magic at each other.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Okay from the other topic, someone brought up the question about why they didn't just shoot Voldemort. Now I use to watch these movies with my ex and drive her up the wall with all my questions cause really a LOT of what the magic community does doesn't make sense and is overly pretentios, but this question I investigated in earnest.

Arguments the dim-witted harry potter fan gives as to why the gun wouldn't work...
1. Muggle technology doesn't work around magic.
2. Voldemort would just be able to stop the bullet with magic
3. Voldemort will keep regenerating until the horcruxes are destroyed
4. If they did that there wouldn't be a story.

well... heres my counter argument,

1. You tell me some sort of electronic device doesn't work, I get it. Theres no telling what a magical aura could do to electricity. However a gun is mechanical and chemical. I have to assume if a pully and rope can work in Harry's universe a revolver would work to. Maybe you could argue that the gun powder wouldn't combust... But an obvious solution to that would be just use the wizard-chemical-equalvelent of gun power. Then you got yourself a magic gun!

2. Bullshit. First off, most of the spells require either saying a two syllable word and making a motion with the wand and I doubt Volde could do that against a bullet. Secondly, Voldemort being the racist that he is wouldn't know what a gun is/does if he saw one so he wouldn't have anyway of anticipating the impending bullet.

3. So Voldemort comes back... Just keep shooting everytime he resurrects. It's not like it's instantaneous, and you could probably do it several times before he actually could come up with an effective counter... and even then, just have hermione snipe him from across the pond. The time granted (instead of being wasted fighting him with magic) would be invaluable in finding the remain horcruxes.

4. NO! I freaking hate this response, because all it is trying to cover up how poor the story really is. Hey, I get a kick out the series, but this is a glaring serious plot hole. The whole reason the stakes are high is because the magic world assumes that unless Harry stops volde the muggles wouldn't stand a chance... Truth of the matter is, and JK Rowling said so herself, that in a straight up war with the magical realm the muggles would win. We have vastly superior technology and armor, not to mention numbers.

The only reason, the only GOOD reason why they didn't shoot Voldemort is because Harry just plain didn't think of doing it... and seeing as how both he and hermione both came from the muggle world and never once even lampshaded it I see is a major flaw in the whole series.

1. Most wizards wouldn't know how to use a gun, since they always rely on magic, and they don't trust muggle technology, since most of it doesn't work.

2. He would see it coming. His father was a muggle and he grew up in a muggle orphanage.

3. They'd run out of bullets after a few times.

 

[siddif]

If you want the wiki version there is Pottermore the official interactive site run by JKR and Sony which is soon to open to the public. Its not just a lexicon of things in the books its also behind the scenes look at how the books were made and the creative process behind that including scrapped chapters, interactive games, etc?. Though when the books themselves arent due to change in content and all of the films are out a hard copy book can also be good. I dont see it as a cop out though as behind the scenes documentaries or biographies are seen as full products so why cant this book?

Harry hasnt interacted with the wizard internet thing because he is in class/fighting evil wizards/hitchhiking around Britain and when not doing that hes in a muggle household with less than basic rights.

Not once did you use the word encyclopaedia, thought Rowling continues to. Any book she writes summarising Harry Potter lore is worthless as it cannot be bound to canon, she could release a new book that contradicts anything in there. Wiki summarises the lore as described in books and how that is relevant to the film adaptations.

How could you do a "behind the scenes documentary" of writing a book? Best you can do is an extended series of interviews, that's broadcast TV or Youtube streaming kind of deal, not some boxed and priced product. Behind the scenes of films are DVD extras, not products in themselves. Interactive games are a side show, should be free on websites or cheap as chips on app-store.

PS: this wizard equivalent of the internet is clearly no equivalent as it is so rare, obscure and inaccessible. That defies the internet's purpose and function, it is NOT an elite network of limited subject matter. They could have used the internet to help a lot in Harry Potter, but they didn't, probably reflecting the author's prejudices on technology's worth.

I used the word lexicon which is a synonym for encyclopaedia or glossary but if you want to make yourself upset about diversity of language feel free?
Anything written by the author (like it or not) is cannon if they deem it to be.
The "behind the scenes" thing I said was an analogue to put such a section into context, but it is very easy to have the creative process documented if you desire. There have been retrospective documentaries sold as complete products also?
The games are free btw the whole Pottermore site will be and should be contain and surpass most of the planned physical book as for as I understand things.

The books are set in the late 90s/Early 2000s when most of the UK was still using dial-up what is accessible and easy about that? Though Riddle's diary mimics a chatroom like interface which was created in the 40s/50s canonically and contains a replica of the creators memory (haven't seen the internet do that yet?) there are other examples i could give but im doing most of this of memory and i dont currently have the books at mine (they are in my mums house)

I have decided that either you yourself grew up in a cupboard under the stairs or just don't want to enjoy anything at all so I'm droppin' the mic here

 

[Doitpow]

1. You tell me some sort of electronic device doesn't work, I get it. Theres no telling what a magical aura could do to electricity. However a gun is mechanical and chemical. I have to assume if a pully and rope can work in Harry's universe a revolver would work to. Maybe you could argue that the gun powder wouldn't combust... But an obvious solution to that would be just use the wizard-chemical-equalvelent of gun power. Then you got yourself a magic gun!

I agree with you here, but I think your asking the wrong question, you ask why not shoot him, when you should be asking why WOULD anyone shoot him.

Why? Muggles are unaware of Voldemort, wizards don't need guns, they have a thousand ways to kill without them, and it's not like people weren't trying to kill Voldemort.
He is immensely secretive, very few people know where he is at any time.
He has a literal army of followers that he can summon at will.
His body is not human, you have no idea if a gunshot would even harm him. His life-force, intelligence, "soul" are not contained in his body, but in his horcruxes, who says he even has a brain for you to shoot out.

2. Bullshit. First off, most of the spells require either saying a two syllable word and making a motion with the wand and I doubt Volde could do that against a bullet. Secondly, Voldemort being the racist that he is wouldn't know what a gun is/does if he saw one so he wouldn't have anyway of anticipating the impending bullet.

Voldemort has inhumanly fast reactions.
Wizards do NOT need to say spells, they only need to think them, this is demonstrated over and over and over.
Voldement doest need to be faster than a bullet, he only need to be faster than the shooter, he sees what they are going to do aaaannnndddd sheild charm (or more likely kill them faster)

3. So Voldemort comes back... Just keep shooting everytime he resurrects. It's not like it's instantaneous, and you could probably do it several times before he actually could come up with an effective counter... and even then, just have hermione snipe him from across the pond. The time granted (instead of being wasted fighting him with magic) would be invaluable in finding the remain horcruxes.

Again the whole bullet might not even harm him thing.
Even if it did, his followers now know that he is indeed unkillable (more or less), and he would be resurrected in a day, The only reason it took so long the first time was everyone thought he was truly defeated