Avada Kedavra punishment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eyeofthetiger

I agree to this to a certain extent. Killing is wrong, there's no way around it. But when you have someone (say like a death eater) who goes around and tortures and/or kills (most of the time both) women, children, men who can not defend themselves, do you think they honestly need to get a nice treatment? Do you have any sympathy for them it all? It isn't like they don't know what they are doing and it's not like they don't understand that it's wrong. And despite the fact that killing is wrong, people like that have got to go. You can't just go around torturing/killing people. The whole reason that there is law is to keep the public safe.

---

It's not so much whether they Deserve to be executed or not, as much as the fact that one of the ways that magic works is that if you kill someone you get your own soul torn. This is not a good thing and is quite bad for the person doing the killing.

So if it is common knowledge that killing someone tears the murderer/executioner/whatever's soul, then it seems unlikely that any country would utilize capital punishment because the cost to the executioner would be too high. Who would agree to be an executioner if they knew their own soul was going to be torn?

Back to the question at hand.

Sirius was convicted of murder not of attempting the Avada Kedavara curse but failing. It is possible that attempted murder, even by use of an Unforgivable, does not carry as stiff a punishment as actually killing someone - regardless of method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AidaLuthien

So if it is common knowledge that killing someone tears the murderer/executioner/whatever's soul, then it seems unlikely that any country would utilize capital punishment because the cost to the executioner would be too high. Who would agree to be an executioner if they knew their own soul was going to be torn?

---

I didn't consider that (but it seems so obvious now). I suppose if a wizarding nation were to employ capital punishment, it would have to be something more indirect, methods involving meat-based clothing and level five magical creatures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aida

It's not so much whether they Deserve to be executed or not, as much as the fact that one of the ways that magic works is that if you kill someone you get your own soul torn. This is not a good thing and is quite bad for the person doing the killing.

---

Actually, that's not quite true. When Snape and Dumbledore are arguing about Draco in The Prince's Tale, Dumbledore says he doesn't want Draco's soul damaged anymore than it already is. Snape then replies:

Quote:

---

'And my soul, Dumbledore? Mine?'

'You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation.'

---

So it seems that the intent has to be to want to kill for malicious means and not because of either justice, self defence or euthanasia. I doubt a state empowered executioner would have his soul placed in jeopardy.

I don;t think Molly's soul was torn in two by killing Bellatrix and that's not just because she didn't use the AK, she still killed someone but it's the taking of life with utter malice and then casting the Horcrux charm that causes a Horcrux.
Also ... if a killer feels remorse, then his soul can mend.

Having said that, there are other spells that can be used to kill someone. Or Potions. Or releasing a Lethifold.

~Carole~

I agree with Equinox Chick...it isn't killing that rips the soul, but murder. I think that's what Slughorn said. So killing someone in self-defense or if you're fighting in a war would not be murder and would not rip the soul. I think execution wouldn't be murder if it's motive was genuine desire to uphold the law and protect society from the criminal, but if the executioner knew that the person was falsely accused and was killing them for revenge, hatred, etc. that would rip their soul. We do know that during the First War the Ministry gave the Aurors power to kill as well as capture...but I seem to remember Dumbledore disagreeing with this, because it would be very easy to make mistakes about who was really a Death Eater...maybe also it wasn't a good idea because the sentence was just carried out without reflection about the true merits of each case and whether life imprisonment wouldn't have served as well...ah, you can tell I'm anti-death penalty, can't you? Maybe in my case then executing somebody would rip my soul...but in the wizarding world criminals can be much more dangerous and difficult to keep locked up than in the Muggle world, so I would make exceptions.