Can you kill a wizard by shooting or stabbing him?

[Tanvi]

I think yes, because, despite of their magical powers, wizards are quite similar to human beings 'physically'...

[[deleted user]]

But a spell may be usd to disarm the assailant, or if not dead instantly they might be able to heal themselves with a spell, or disapperate to a wizard hospital so someone else can fix them.

[Amanda]

Oh definitely. They are just human physically as well as being wizards. I'm guessing it would be hard unless you caught them offguard though as they would have their wands.


http://divaliciouzbookreviews.blogspo...

[Tanvi]

Amanda wrote: "Oh definitely. They are just human physically as well as being wizards. I'm guessing it would be hard unless you caught them offguard though as they would have their wands.


http://divaliciouzbook..."

Then Harry could have just killed, if not Voldemort, atleast the other death eaters so easily! Simply carry a loaded gun... Yeah, I know a wand is even more powerful, but... I think there's more to this.

[Beatrice]

Well... You might want to consider that Harry is not trained to shoot, and probably couldn't hit a moving target from a great distance - which is what would be required to kill a death eater, as he's have to catch them unaware

[[deleted user]]

Wouldn't that make Harry a cold blooded assasin? Would make for a rather different story!! Does he ever actually kill any body, magically or otherwise? He freezes people and disarms them, but kill them? (With the exception of Voldy)

[Amanda]

Tanvi wrote: "Amanda wrote: "Oh definitely. They are just human physically as well as being wizards. I'm guessing it would be hard unless you caught them offguard though as they would have their wands.


http..."
I know what you mean but there has to be a story there too. That could be the answer to so many other books out there 'oh but couldn't he just have done this and then everything would have been fine' but then there would be no tale to tell. The story takes place in the wizarding world not the muggle world. JKR chose to do this. It would totally defeat the purpose of her story if someone just shot Voldemort and that was it. It's a great thing to be so interested in a book that it makes people have questions about it but not every detail should be questioned, there comes a point where you have to just let go and get on with the story as it is. I think if people question everything then there is no enjoyment to the tale.



http://divaliciouzbookreviews.blogspo...

[[deleted user]]

It's kind of like saying, why in lord of the rings didn't frodo hop on the back of a dragon, or some other flying creature and drop the ring in from over head. Would have been ALOT quicker and safer, but the story wouldn't really have existed.

[Ciara]

Of course! But wizards could use spells to prevent this from happening, and if the wounds weren't too bad, it could be helped with a spell.

[Alya]

In Potterverse Wizards and Witches ARE human. They just have the ability to harness and use magic. Other than that there is no difference between them and Muggles.
But in other stories like Lord of the Rings, Gandalf isnt human, he is of the lesser Valar which are basically "angelic beings ". (correct me if Im wrong, since my LOTR knowledge is really limited)
So it depends on the world and setting of the book, but in the case of Harry Potter, yes you can kill Wizards and Witches with guns :P

[Heather]

Yes, shooting or stabbing a wizard would kill the wizard. The question is if you could get close enogh to a wizard to kill them...

[Chloe]

Of course you can, but it would have to be a pretty damn good shot. If you got them in a place where they wouldn't die rather instantly then I'm sure the wound could be healed with some sort of magic (potion, spell, ect.) As for Harry having a gun would make the book quicker and whatnot... I don't think that's true. Honestly if he had a gun he would be much more vulnerable.. think about it, would he carry the gun in one hang and wand in the other? And if not, he would be without a want at least sometimes, and guns wont prevent any other spells from hitting him. If he was teamed up, which happens quite frequently, then he's screwed. At least some spells can disarm several opponents at once. Essentially, I think the series would have ended a lot quicker which Harry dead... and I'm sure we can all agree that would have been absolutely awful!!

[Carmon]

They're human so they'd be able to die they same way any other human would. Remember how Malfoy tried to poison Dumbledore? Wizards just have more ways to protect and heal themselves.

Also as to why they don't use guns; wizards tend to shun muggle technology, they don't use computers, telephones, electricity, ball point pens etc even though they would make their lives alot easier (for example making a phone call is a lot quicker then sending a letter by owl). But they tend to stick with magic so it makes sense that they would fight with magic too and i imagine a lot of wizarding families wouldn't even know what a gun is

[Louisa]

Sure, but if someone pointed a gun at a wizard wouldn't they just expelliarmus (no idea how you spell that)

[[deleted user]]

in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a stopper to death by some spell, until they are caught off gaurd

[Carmon]

Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a stopper to death ..."

Well that's what voldemort tried to do with his hocruxes and the potion that gave him a body and brought him back to full strength.

Not to mention the philosophers stone which kept you a live as well

[Gretchen]

Tanvi said (Then Harry could have just killed, if not Voldemort, atleast the other death eaters so easily! Simply carry a loaded gun... Yeah, I know a wand is even more powerful, but... I think there's more to this.)



Please correct me if I am wrong but Harry actually never killed anyone. Even Voldemort died because of the deflection of his own death kill. So it would sort of defeat the purpose of his character.

[[deleted user]]

Cmeron wrote:Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a stopper to death ..."

Well that's what voldemort tried to do with his hocruxes and the potion that gave him a body and brought him back to full strength.

Not to mention the philosophers stone which kept you a live as well


well yeah but isnt Snape a potions teacher. I bet he meant some potion that could postpone death

[Affably]

Rofl just load a gun with Glaser safety round and even a wizard probably couldn't heal the damage.

[Isabelle]

how about if you transfigure the bullet before it hits you (like to water or something?) or if you cast a protego spell?

[Elia]

Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a stopper to death ..."

Actually, I think what Snape was saying with this line is that he can teach them how to brew a potion that will kill someone. As in put a stoper (like a bottle stopper or a cork) on a bottle full of stuff that will make you dead.

As to the point of the thread, Wizards are not invulnerable to muggle weapons or to getting hurt - Mr. Weasley almost died when he was bitten by a snake after all. And though they may be able to use a spell like expelliarmus to disarm someone with a gun or a knife, some wizards don't even know what guns ARE, I mean, look at all the trouble the Wealsey's have with muggle artifacts, like stamps on letters or electrical cords. So maybe if someone DID point a gun at them they wouldn't even realize it was a weapon until it was too late.

[Tanvi]

@Steph and Gretchen: Yes, I agree Harry never killed. What I meant was, people like the Aurors could have used guns. (I know it sounds hilarious)

But I will have to agree with Amanda. At some point you have to let go and get on with the story.

[Tanvi]

Elia wrote: "Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a ..."

exactly. Many wouldn't even know what a bullet does before it hits them! But I guess they still will be able to heal themselves.

[[deleted user]]

Elia wrote: "Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizards can put a ..."

I don't think he meant that, i think he meant by putting a stopper in death (or however it is phrased) that you can stop death...i.e make a potion just like with the stone, and stop yourself from dying.

[Elia]

Steph wrote: "Elia wrote: "Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something. i think wizar..."

The reason I would have to disagree with that is because if such a potion could be made, why would Snape not just have made that for Voldemort when he was a death eater, before he became a double agent?

[Uditi]

I think that maybe the death eaters would have thought that a gun is for muggles who are to weak because they can't use magic.
A gun was invented by muggles and they think that muggles are the worst so they wouldn't want anything to do with it. And magic is more powerful anyways.
As for the others then I agree they wouldn't know what on earth a gun was and muggle borns/half bloods could easily disarm them.

[Katrina]

Wizards are still humans. Even with their magical abilities, they cannot escape death and the fact that they are not immortal to anything, even with horcruxes and whatnot.

[♥ Alexia -Team Malec ♥]

Amanda wrote: "Tanvi wrote: "Amanda wrote: "Oh definitely. They are just human physically as well as being wizards. I'm guessing it would be hard unless you caught them offguard though as they would have their wa..."

I Couldn't have said it better.

[Mikaela]

You could kill them, they are not immortal, 'cept well Voldemort

[[deleted user]]

Elia wrote: "Steph wrote: "Elia wrote: "Vishakha wrote: "in the first part(the movie i dont remember about the book) Snape says he can teach the students 'how to a stopper to death', thats gotta mean something...."

Well I disagree, seeing as there were ways of doing it...i.e the stone, they just didn't have the stone

[[deleted user]]

Amanda wrote: "Oh definitely. They are just human physically as well as being wizards. I'm guessing it would be hard unless you caught them offguard though as they would have their wands.


http://divaliciouzbook..."
I dont feel that there is any more I can say about this after this comment! Except that Voldemort obviously couldn't have just been shot and killed because of the horcruxes. They still would have to have been destroyed before he could be killed. Magic is too complicated and detailed to just kill immortal people with guns. It doesn't work that way.

[Sparrowlicious]

... you know, I think the only reason Harry Potter takes place in a world in which wizardry is hidden from non-wizards but is otherwise like our world is because using an established world is much easier than creating one. Life in Hogwarts is mostly medieval but people use their magic to make everyday things easier. This is quite controversal since all the stuff in our modern world makes our life much easier so we don't need to depend on 'magic'.
So yeah, a wizard could be killed by those means but think about it - they don't use muggle tools for things like this.

[Aidyn]

srrsly guys, just shoot voldy in the head

[Helen]

Joss Whedon tackled this subject in season 6 of Buffy - what happens when you shoot a slayer and a witch. In that franchise, a gun was just as harmful to supernatural beings as to regular humans. I think the same would be true in the world of Harry Potter - but it may be that JK either didn't want to venture down that road, or felt that guns had no place in the world, being a muggle weapon. Given Voldemorts arrogance about magic I can't imagine him ever lowering himself to pick up a muggle weapon - although it would have been poetic justice if he'd been killed with one!

[Bad Wolf]

TAKE THAT YOU DARK LORD!

[Gabriel Laurent]

Is it possible? Yes. Physiologically, they're just like humans. Would it be easy? Probably not. They could disapparate away from harm or cast a spell or something. It wouldn't have worked on Voldemort due to the horcruxes he created, and I'm sure there must be all kinds of dark magic that could be used to protect the user from being shot or stabbed.

[Affably]

Gabe wrote: "Is it possible? Yes. Physiologically, they're just like humans. Would it be easy? Probably not. They could disapparate away from harm or cast a spell or something. It wouldn't have worked on Voldem..."

Actually I think that the human reaction time is something akin to 0.5 seconds so if you shoot them before they notice the gun itself you should be able to kill them, providing that you are using the right kind of ammunition of course.

[Bad Wolf]

They would probably be like "What the heck?" and then die.

[Sebastian]

They're human like everyone else...Except for voldywart, who can't take death like the skeever he is

(don't know what a skeever is? Its a giant ugly rat and its from Skyrim)

[Mitali]

While it's probably possible to kill witches/wizards if you shoot them point blank, I think that magical people in the HP universe have some amount of inherent protection against 'Muggle' injuries. For example, in the first book, Hagrid is insulted when Petunia says that Harry's parents died in a car crash: 'How could a car crash kill James and Lily?' The implication seems to be that witches/wizards would not be easily killed by such mundane means.

There's also the sheer recklessness witches/wizards display towards what are potentially life-threatening situations, and their complete disregard for ordinary safety protocols. In GoF, four teenagers compete in what are literally death defying tasks. The most popular magical sport involves children flying on broomsticks hundreds of feet up in the air, with no form of safety belts or anything whatsoever that would prevent, say, an inexperienced flyer from simply slipping off his broom and plummeting to his death. Neville falls off his broom in PS/SS; Harry falls off his several times in the course of the series. In the former case, Neville merely suffers a broken wrist. Harry's worst injuries are a broken arm and a cracked skull, both of which are healed overnight. If a Muggle had fallen in such a way, wouldn't they have died, or at least been injured far more? But witches/wizards treat such possible injuries very casually, which may be because they aren't so easily hurt.

Another example is Neville's story in PS/SS of how he 'bounced' when his uncle accidentally dropped him from an upper storey window. A Muggle child, of course, would have been killed or severely injured. In fact, this incident is what convinces Neville's family that he is not a squib. Witch/wizard children spontaneously defend themselves magically when they are in danger, even before they have learnt any spells or have a wand. It's likely that this ability persists throughout life, and all witches/wizards can deflect non-magical injuries spontaneously to some extent. In other words, you might be able to kill a witch/wizard with a gun if you sneak up on them with one, but if they're aware of it, they might be able to defend themselves, whether or not they have a wand with them.

[Jeni]

I would like to think that having magical powers has a benefit other than cool spells. I am sincere when I say I think it would take a very careless wizard (or a suicidal one) to be taken unawares by a bullet.

[Luna Belle Pris]

Good question. I believe magic is stronger and the only honorable way in the Wizarding World. Plus Muggle weapons are as familiar and useful to typical Magic Folk as driving a car. It would be as silly to use them as one may consider stabbing someone else with a banana.

[Ashir]

Isabelle wrote: "how about if you transfigure the bullet before it hits you (like to water or something?) or if you cast a protego spell?"

Before a bullet hits you? If the trigger is pulled, it is impossible to cast a spell to disfigure a bullet. First you have to aim exactly at the bullet, and the bullet is going at supersonic speeds. You cant blurt out the word "protego" before the bullet hits you either. Protego also might work against a single bullet, but it doesnt stand a chance if it is being shot with a high caliber and fully automatic gun.

[Ashir]

Louisa wrote: "Sure, but if someone pointed a gun at a wizard wouldn't they just expelliarmus (no idea how you spell that)"

If a gun was already being pointed at you, if the person holding the gun saw a slight twitch in your hand (when you are moving the wand for the spell) or mouth when you were going to blurt out the spell, they would probably fire and you wouldnt have a chance to finish your "expelliarmus."

[Ashir]

deleted user wrote: "But a spell may be usd to disarm the assailant, or if not dead instantly they might be able to heal themselves with a spell, or disapperate to a wizard hospital so someone else can fix them."

If you have already been shot, you will likely be shot multiple more times and not have the chance to apparate or heal yourself as you are taking more and more bullets. Also, if you are trying to disarm someone with a gun, you will likely get shot before you can blurt out the spell. When they see the slight movement in your wrist for the waving of the wand for the spell, they will likely fire.

[Ashir]

Ciara wrote: "Of course! But wizards could use spells to prevent this from happening, and if the wounds weren't too bad, it could be helped with a spell."

Magic may be more versatile, but guns are very good at killing. If you were going to blurt out a spell, its likely too late because the trigger has been pulled and the bullet has reached you, because bullets travel much faster than supersonic speeds.

[Vidhi]

Well I think yes but also why to use a knife for stabbing when you have got a wand which can do magic.