Skip to main content

harry potter - Are Muggle-born Wizards automatically subject to Wizarding Laws?


Related to this question: What happens if a muggle-born wizard doesn't want to learn magic?


If the muggle-born child isn't tutored in magic, is he/she still subject to wizarding laws?


Are they going to be bound by the Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery if they don't have a wand and are never properly trained in magic? Tom Riddle and Lily Evans had varying degrees of control over their magic even without wands and training. They intuitively were able to control the force within themselves. They had the advantage of attending Hogwarts, but what if they hadn't?


Are they going to lock up a kid who doesn't / can't attend school but is still using their magical abilities?



Answer



The answer has nothing to do with Harry Potter but with a vast majority of human Judicial systems which inherited Roman legal concept of "ignorantia legis non excusat", or "ignorance of the law is no excuse". (quote source is Yahoo answers).


Therefore, whether a student who was Muggleborn attended Hogwarts, or did not, the only difference is that the former would be aware of the laws, and as we know from above, being subject to their jurisdiction would NOT be affected by the distinction.


We know that underage wizards who accidentally cause magical events are not subject to punishments (see Harry's incident with Python at the zoo) as they can't control their magic, which is the main distinction.


But once a wizard is shown ability to control it, they will be equally subject to the restrictions whether they are muggleborn or not, went to Hogwarts or not.



The main reason for posssibly confusing this is the following correllation: presumably, Muggle-born kids who went to Hogwarts can no longer claim they were producing magic by accident, as they were taught about magic; whereas a "feral" Muggle-born could use that defense, as Tom Riddle probably would have done had he needed to. But if the Ministry could prove that "feral" wizard was using magic on purpose, then they would be subject to the Laws.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

tolkiens legendarium - Did Gandalf wear his Ring of Power throughout the trilogy?

After Gandalf discovered that Sauron was back and sent Frodo on his quest to Rivendell, did he continue to wear Narya (one of the Three Rings)? It seems like a huge risk to continue to wear it after the Nazgûl (Ringwraiths) started to try and reclaim the One Ring; if they managed to get the ring to Sauron, couldn't he be corrupted by his power? Whatever powers Narya bestows upon him couldn't possibly be worth the huge risk, could it? Answer When Sauron forged the one ring and put it on his finger, the other ring bearers were immediately aware of him and his intentions and removed their own rings. There is no reason why they couldn't merely do so again. As soon as Sauron set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they knew him, and preceived that he would be master of them, and of all they wrought. Then in anger and fear they took off their rings. "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age," Silmarillion
Post a Comment
Read more