The Dresden Files > DF Reference Collection
Harry's murders of Non-humans! (Cold Days spoilers)
ebliss1:
--- Quote ---In other words... where have you seen evidence in the series of such a character? Where have we seen a criminally-inclined magic user that acted to harm mortals without using magic? Have we seen anyone abuse this "loophole" yet? I'm wracking my brain trying to think of someone, but I can't. I'd posit that you're exactly right, there would be contamination, so there always is, and therefore the point you're trying to make is moot.
--- End quote ---
Obviously we have not seen an in-book example of this, but the way they are written lends itself to this exact scenario being "possible". The DV magic-effects-scale does not take intent into account. Any magic that kills - even if the intent of the spell was benign - irreversibly turns a practitioner into a warlock, inless it was self-defense. If Harry were to come across a person freezing to death, and use a spell to light a fire to warm them, but that fire subsequently causes a building to ignite and kill a homeless person inside, he's irrevocably tainted. The argument that he "inherantly believed that the homeless person should burn to death" falls apart since it was an unintended consequence, but the law and its rationale in the DV are absolute. He's a warlock and must die. Whether he feels remorse and that remorse messes up his mind, or if he simply chalks it up to "bad things happen and there's nothing you can do, but at least the freezing person's life was saved, so its a wash" is immaterial.
--- Quote ---Huh. I always figured that the WCouncil operated on the principle that they would take care of magical crimes and let the mortal authorities deal with the mundane crimes-- even if they are perpetrated by wizards.
--- End quote ---
But my point is that this has nothing to do with administration of justice. The WC does not execute wizards who have killed via magic as punishment or as a cosmic scale balancing. They do so because the person has become an irredeemable monster who will do nothing but inflict more suffering on others exponentially. Mortals have the concept of Justifiable Homicide. If a criminal is hurting someone and you take action to save the victim even if your won life is not in danger, but in the process the criminal dies, that's justifiable homicide. Do so with magic, and you need to die. That's according to Eb and has nothing to do with right and wrong.
knnn:
--- Quote from: novaseaker on November 19, 2013, 07:23:43 PM ---In other words... where have you seen evidence in the series of such a character? Where have we seen a criminally-inclined magic user that acted to harm mortals without using magic? Have we seen anyone abuse this "loophole" yet? I'm wracking my brain trying to think of someone, but I can't. I'd posit that you're exactly right, there would be contamination, so there always is, and therefore the point you're trying to make is moot.
--- End quote ---
None of these completely prove anything, but:
- Morgan ("a.k.a. uphold the Laws at all costs guy") uses a sword to execute criminals.
- Remember that the rational for why Luccio didn't kill La Fortier with magic is because the Laws were so strongly ingrained in her psyche. This obviously didn't apply to killing him by mundane means.
- Morgan uses a gun to kill Peabody.
- Harry kills Corpstaker with a gun. Luccio complains that he raised Sue, nothing is mentioned about the killing.
peregrine:
--- Quote from: knnn on November 19, 2013, 09:06:36 PM ---- Remember that the rational for why Luccio didn't kill La Fortier with magic is because the Laws were so strongly ingrained in her psyche. This obviously didn't apply to killing him by mundane means.
--- End quote ---
It wasn't the law against using magic that stopped her, it was that at some point, she thought it was wrong, and didn't have the solid belief needed to use magic.
knnn:
--- Quote from: peregrine on November 19, 2013, 09:17:52 PM ---It wasn't the law against using magic that stopped her, it was that at some point, she thought it was wrong, and didn't have the solid belief needed to use magic.
--- End quote ---
Point is, she had no compunction about killing sans magic. If there was worry of taint, I would have expected similar resistance.
novaseaker:
--- Quote from: knnn on November 19, 2013, 09:06:36 PM ---None of these completely prove anything, but:
- Morgan ("a.k.a. uphold the Laws at all costs guy") uses a sword to execute criminals.
- Remember that the rational for why Luccio didn't kill La Fortier with magic is because the Laws were so strongly ingrained in her psyche. This obviously didn't apply to killing him by mundane means.
- Morgan uses a gun to kill Peabody.
- Harry kills Corpstaker with a gun. Luccio complains that he raised Sue, nothing is mentioned about the killing.
--- End quote ---
None of these, except for Luccio and La Fortier, are criminal behavior. They are more akin to a police officer taking out a clear and present threat, which is a peacekeeping endeavor. The fact that the peacekeepers restrain themselves and not use magic is the very evidence that they are not becoming corrupted, because they still believe in restraining their own power.
The unfortunate situation with Luccio is more evidence of someone with a normally morally upright character resisting the corruption caused by mind control. While the compulsion magic made her kill La Fortier, it couldn't change who she fundamentally was, ergo, no actual corruption and use of magic.
I guess my explanation is more Doylist than Watsonian. You won't see someone that can restrain their power when they're normally committing wanton crimes, because the universe as written by Jim won't allow someone to show that unrealistic level of control. If you're the type to abuse power, then you abuse power, no matter what form it takes. Jeffery Dhamer would not have been able to restrain himself from using magic in his atrocities if he had the capacity to use it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version