My new signature

 

I would say if I lost my memories of my family, but still retained what defines me as a person then yes in a heartbeat. If I remembered everything though then life would be pretty damn guilt-ridden.

As an aside do we show up in our current ages? Or 10/11 year olds receiving our Hogwarts/Magical School letters?

 

Depends - is Dumbledore alive? If so, yes. If not... still probably yes.

 

Probably would want to steer away from Britain and its surroundings for a while and visit safer horizons, but yes.

I might be able to tinker up some interesting stuff.

 

Why would I need to trade my life for a magic one if a gun is all you need to kill a wizard? Obvious trolling is amusing anyways.

 

That's just untrue, there are several differences in the muggle world as well. It's clearly different from our world.

Brockdale Bridge, Godric's Hollow, Little Hangleton, Little Whinging, etc.

All involving muggles and all different than in our world.

Then there may be other differences such as an altered Arthurian Myth with King Arthur and Merlin existing way later than in the real world.

 

I always took those things to be euphemisms. A kind of "names have been changed to protect identities" sort of thing.

Like how, in LotR, Frodo's name is actually Maura Labingi, and Frodo is just the name the narrator uses.

 

Would you still do it if Voldemort was around?

 

It's 2015, Voldemort isn't around.

 

I personally was 11 in 2001, well after Voldemort has been dealt with by Harry.

EDIT:

That's a nice approach, though I personally prefer the Potterverse to really be a world with slightly alternate history.

 

Isn't Frodo supposed to be the English translation of Maura?

 

I sure as fuck would. Assuming you gain magic, there is an immense amount you could do to move the world one step closer to utopia. Ending muggle wars, curing diseases, selective political intervention - the possibilities are endless.

 

And then you get arrested for breaking the Statute of Secrecy.

 

I can envision a number of discrete magical ways of achieving all the things fire talked about.

The easiest is: Is there any law against Imperiusing muggles or otherwise manipulating them to do things?

 

I'd adopt Grindelwald's agenda. Incite glorious revolution. Overthrow the ministry and abolish the Statute of Secrecy. Then rule supreme over Europe until someone assassinates me.

 

Yes to using the Imperius curse on muggles. That's completely illegal. However otherwise manipulating through magical means seems to be more of a legal grey area. Ron apparently used the confundus charm on a driving instructor, and they were obliviating muggles left and right at the World Cup without a second though given to their long term mental state.

I imagine it's something along the lines of, "If it doesn't break the Statute of Secrecy outright, or it isn't illegal to use against a fellow wizard/witch, it's fine."

 

There is a branch of the Department of Magical Accidents and Catastrophes that has Obliviators working for them, so there is the possibility of it being a restricted spell in the same way Portus is. There's no canon ruling one way or the other, though.

 

Hello teenage Dumbledore! A little passionate about the subject, aren't we? Don't worry, you'll grow up soon enough.

Now, now, Gellert, don't go filling the poor boy's head with ideas.

 

Ah, perhaps I wasn't being clear. I think obliviation as a whole is probably illegal to use on muggles, aside from Obliviators themselves. I meant that the casual way that they obliviated the muggle in GoF, despite it clearly messing with his head (even if it was played for laughs), indicates that wizards might not care about a wizard manipulating a muggle with magic.

 

I find it more likely that there were Obliviators on hand for that sort of thing, especially because the World Cup was such a big event that the Ministry needed to work overtime to keep the muggles from finding out.