(Discussion split from the HP questions thread. - Drome)

Does getting expelled from Hogwarts also mean your wand gets snapped?

If so, why wasn't Bellatrix's wand snapped when she was sent to Azkaban?

 

Hagrid's wand was snapped, Harry was worried that they would snap his wand when he almost got expelled in OotP. We don't actually know if Bellatrix's wand was snapped or not, she could very easily have just picked up another one once she got out.

 

Yes, there are multiple mentions in the canon that getting expelled from Hogwarts would cause your wand to get snapped.

Bellatrix wasn't sent to Azkaban for getting expelled from Hogwarts. She got imprisoned because she used the Cruciatus Curse on the Longbottoms.

As for why her wand didn't get snapped, even when she was going to spend the rest of her life in Azkaban, I have no clue.

But we can know from the Deathly Hallows that the wand she had after her imprisonment was the same one she used to torture the Longbottoms.

 

Yeah, I know, which is what bothers me about her wand being left intact.

Thanks.

 

It's evidence.

 

I thought that the reason that someone who was expelled from Hogwarts had their wand snapped was because they didn't complete their magical education.

The wand being snapped may be effectively banishing that person from the wizarding world: perhaps because someone who does not complete their education is deemed to be a danger to the rest of society?

 

I can understand where you're coming from with that sort of reasoning, but wouldn't a person who used the Cruciatus curse, to such a degree that the minds of its victims were broken, also qualify as someone who's a danger to the rest of society? Not to mention being a Death Eater and all that entailed.

And evidence? What for? Bellatrix had a trial and was convicted for her crime.

 

I'm not sure where the issue is.

If you get expelled from Hogwarts you have your wand snapped.

If you are convicted of a criminal offence you get sent to Azkaban.

The two things are completely unrelated.

 

Just how weird it is that you don't get your wand snapped if it turns out you're a murdering terrorist.

But if you get expelled from Hogwarts, though granted the reason behind Hagrid's expulsion was that they believed him responsible for the death of a student, for whatever reason that may be, your wand would apparently get snapped. If I'm not mixing up fanon with canon here, Snape wanted Harry expelled for the way they arrived to school in their 2nd year at Hogwarts. Then again, this is Snape I'm talking about, so yeah, bias ahoy.

Anyway, next question: if someone's wand did get snapped, would they be legally allowed to acquire another one?

 

Twins left before taking their NEWT exams without consequences. Supposedly OWLs are enough to seek work, but Trace will vanish at wizard's 17th birthday even if they failed several years. The reason to snap someone's wand is crime, not lack of competence. As in the case of Hagrid - it was because of Aragog. I'm not sure of this example, but one of squibs(Arabella Figg?) talked about transfigurating bag of tea as their biggest magical achievement. This would suggest they also get wands at some moment and I can't imagine Ministry snapping them.

The only question is: can wizard get expelled from Hogwart without breaking law and getting arrested?

Edit: It would make sense - Hagrid didn't get new wand and hid snapped one.

 

Well, they're in prison. Snapping the wand would be redundant since they don't have it in their possession.

1. Hagrid was not convicted of any crime as far as we know. He was expelled but not sent to prison.

2. When Harry was expelled in OotP they were going to snap his wand but there was no suggestion of sending him to Azakban. The snapping of the wand was explicitly a result of being expelled.

3. No squib ever mentions being able to cast magic in canon. I think you're thinking of a fanfic here, because in canon squibs are just Muggles with magical parents.

 

You don't destroy evidence just because the person is found guilty.

 

I found this fragment with teabag... It was mistranslation. :/

Hagrid was certainly arrested and only Dumbledore's influences sheltered him from consequences. At least it seems logical - Ministry officials are responsible for snapping wands, aren't they? So it require presence of Aurors since he was seen as dangerous and possible murderer(even without evidence).

 

Hagrid was arrested in Chamber of Secrets, nothing was ever said about him being arrested when he got expelled from school.

 

The snapping of wands on expulsion serves the exact same purpose as the trace: to make Harry miserable at home and make him want to go back to Hogwarts. To advance the plot. Trying to come up with a reason for why those two exist in the form they do won't lead you any further than wondering why Dumbledore didn't just use fidelius on the Philosopher's Stone.

The world of Harry Potter works on Rule of Cool. It doesn't have to make sense.

 

Ok, it wasn't said. So do you think wands are snapped on the middle of corridor or something like that? It sounds stupid. Just like "Oh, hey, guy! We think you are guilty so we will just take you wand away and not even ask any questions! Don't worry, your help is unnecessary to carry out proper investigation! We will leave you here, at Hogwarts, and then you can somehow retreat to Muggle World!".

And wasn't the Stone used to just bait Voldemort?

 

This is effectively true, but not actually helpful to the discussion in any way.

These kinds of topics are all about exploring the logic of canon: if there are logical inconsistencies, then we'll explore possible explanations behind them, or at least present canon evidence for an author who wants to play around in the HP universe to interpret how they'd like.

So yeah - don't be so eager to dismiss a topic out of hand.

 

You guys seem to forget that you don't have to be a murderer to be sent to Azkaban. Fletcher had a stint in Azkaban because of smuggling or something similar if I remember correctly. If you snap the wand of everyone who went to Azkaban, you'd have a problem I think.

 

True, but there's still a vast difference between smuggling/stealing and what Bellatrix did.

I'm not saying everyone who goes to Azkaban for any amount of time should be treated the same, even though they all tend to be exposed to the Dementors (though I imagine there's even some kind of logic which mandates how much people get exposed to them in the first place), but Bellatrix's crime was no lightweight thing. given that the use of any one of the three Unforgivable Curses guaranteed you life sentence in Azkaban.

So while I can certainly understand that not every criminal gets its wand snapped, cases like Bellatrix's just seem like an odd choice to leave them whole.

 

Would it be illegal to get another one- yes. If it was snapped by the authorities. I say this because it seems logical Hagrid can't use a wand, rather than just his wand.

I think losing your wand, the first bonded one, would be somewhat traumatic. I know there are a lot of other things going on but Lucius having lost his wand will never be the same. The wand to me is part school credentials, part trade experience, part citizenship, part license, it's a lot of things- rights and freedoms. Without it you really are a second class citizen if one at all (Hagrid is very lucky to have Dumbledore despite his bad luck). Most would be as good as a squib, and lucky to raise kneazles.

PS. Why snap wand if a criminal? Either you are in for life, or you serve your time and regain your wand (which is much more than just a weapon). Sounds like our systems to me.