The voters have decided that Shadowslipping is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.
Also by Shadowslipping+84The Harry Potter series would have ended pretty quickly if someone brought a gun, amirite?
Also about Books+105If you read the text, then it becomes visual aid for wherever you're reading, amirite?
Also about Books+145Lack of a book about boy who was kept under the stairs and believed he is a wizard is a huge missed opportunity, amirite?
Also about Books-56A racist childrens book is actually a perfect teaching tool to learn about racism and should be distributed to our children, amirite?
Also by Shadowslipping+46A perfect "living statue" street performer would make no money because people wouldn't know. amirite?
Also by Shadowslipping+39Harry Potter is famous in two universes. amirite?
while loading gun
Check out the HISHE one of Harry Potter. Absolutely great
Doubtful. Even kids in Hogwarts could probably transfigure the gun into something harmless. Also don't forget some wizards in HP universe can cast spells without wands or even needing to speak so you could get blasted without even knowing what's coming. You could get commanded by the imperius curse to shoot yourself. You would also have trouble hitting anyone when they can apparate all over the room in a flash. You could think of a thousands ways you could beat someone with a gun.
A gun would be pretty much useless in the HP universe.
But Lilly was willing to die and didn't fight back. Bullets don't rebound from love, do they?
I don't see why they wouldn't. Lily's protection isn't just from magical things.
This guy Harry Potters. Impressive.
Well Voldemort could have just shot baby Harry when he had the chance instead of cursing him...
Or just throw him out of the window
Rowling noted that wizard babies bounce recently
I do not trust anything Rowling tells me since that Hufflepuff Masturbation Thing
I mustve missed that, sauce so I can laugh too?
I doubt it. If Voldemort can't touch Harry or cast a spell on him, I doubt a bullet would've worked.
He had no reason to believe the killing curse wouldn't be effective though
The religious debates over Harry Potter was one thing, I don't think the franchise needs a firearm control debate as well.
I've always wondered about this. Casting a spell takes a lot more time than pulling a trigger!
Clint Eastwood would own Dumbledore
Practice those Nonverbal spells my dude.
And at any distance, it hits you before you know it was ever fired, zero time to react. It would be a pretty funny ending, this big wizard battle, and some dude with a rifle just takes out Voldemort in the middle of his big speech. Everyone just stares at each other, like, what the hell?
But couldn't you cast a spell to protect you from bullets??
It wouldn't be even close to the craziest thing magic can do, so probably.
No they have a spell that is basically just a laser gun
"Why didn't they use guns?!"
Eagles flying to Mordor flashbacks begin
Hagrid just bent the barrel with his hands
"The infant is immune to the killing spell, if only they were vulnerable to some other sort of damage"
Like magically being pushed out of a window! "Erictus Claptonia"
I would just throw a hungry honey badger into the cot, aint no normal person or wizard infant gunna throw hands at a honey badger
"Well you forgot one thing Voldemort, bullets are faster than spells" dramatic action music
muggles and wizards were born different, but sam colt made them equal
I've just started reading the books. Now this is gonna be on my mind throughout the entire journey.