Buffy killing Faith - Right/Wrong?

WOW, should I feel honored that you had so much to say about my short little post? 🙂

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. Although I do think you contradicted yourself a little when you first said Buffy wasn't acting out of vengeance, but then you said "Well if you don't take into account the stuff like circumstance, motivation and the victim then I guess they are the same." If you take all that way, what else is left but vengeance?

Oh well... Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I stand by mine.
 
palabravampiress said:
Well, Faith shot Angel with a poison-tipped arrow for which the only cure was slayer blood. There are two slayers: Faith and Buffy. What did she expect? In this scenario, someone has got to die, and who better than the one who started it all by trying to kill Angel? Sometimes you reap what you sow.

I think Buffy was justified. Human law tends to have a loophole for acting in defense of yourself or your loved ones. If someone tries to kill you or your loved ones, it is generally considered right and even noble to try and kill that person right back. The only questionable factor here is the time lapse between the poison arrow and the attempt to feed Faith to Angel. Typically, this loophole only works in the heat of the moment. But since no human law could really cover this situation, I think Buffy made the best decision that she could at the time -- for all the good it did her, given the way things turned out, but still.

Don't kill humans is a good rule of thumb. Sometimes, though, you have to know when to break the rules. If your choice is between a reformed vampire who helps save the world a lot and a rogue slayer who abuses her power and kills whomever she pleases, then it would be sort of irresponsible to choose the rogue slayer just because she leans more toward the human side of the spectrum. You'd really just be unleashing a dangerous force on the world while simultaneously destroying one of the good guys who can help to stop/control that dangerous force. I'd say this is a good time to break the rules.
Click to expand...
Ah, the beauty of the gray-area Buffyverse. 🙂
[br][/br]
Edit:
[br][/br]
AgentX7k said:
But Buffy wasn't acting out of vengeance or grief. Those may have been contributing factors but not primary motivations. If she wanted revenge she could have gone after her at any moment, Angels impending fate put some fire under her ass to do what had to be done from the start. It was about saving Angel, if Angel had died then yes I would agree it was about revenge.

Well if you don't take into account the stuff like circumstance, motivation and the victim then I guess they are the same.

There are many contributing factors to every case which have to be examined individually; this is even how it is done in a court of law.

Buffy was killing a murderer to save an innocent man who she loved; Faith was attempting to poison an innocent man in a conspiracy to kill thousands of people, and that was just one of her crimes, there also the fact that was a renegade killer who could not be held by any jail, plus the only people who could handle her (the council) were doing nothing.

But what other choice was there? Buffy could have simply beat Faith into unconsciousness and then handed her over to the Council in the past. But at the time with the circumstances (Angel/Graduation) that wasn't an option unless she wanted to let Angel die and just kill Faith later in the battle.

Plus I still call what she did defense, she is deciding Angels life is worth more than Faiths, but so does everyone who kills in self-defense, they are deciding that their (or someone else's) life is worth more than the person trying to end it. The only difference is here it's not a split-second decision and appears more like premeditated murder.

Although I could agree that it was a wrong act but the right choice. Like say you have the choice of killing a dog as oppose to not killing it. One is a right and wrong act making it an easy right and wrong choice. But say you then had to choose between killing a dog or a person? In this case killing the dog would be the right choice, but still a wrong act.
Click to expand...
I guess you and I are the only one's whom think Buffy wasn't justified in killing Faith. 😉
 
BuffyElevated
BuffyElevated
[No message]
Well, if anyone tried to kill someone I loved I wouldn't let them get away with it (I hope).

An eye for an eye. She needed to be killed as soon as she joined the Mayor.

Of course, she did become a good person. I guess all she needed was to be shown that being good is better than being bad, but with the knowledge Buffy had, what could she do other than to try to kill Faith?

I think that if Buffy could have dragged Faith to Angel, without killing her, she would, but she was desperate and I can't blame her one bit for it.
 
At the end of the day she was probably wrong...but I don't see it as TOO morally questionable to kill a crazed murderer who'd likely kill again.
 
If i were Buffy, she'd be at the pointy end of the knife. Sorry, but you try to kill my boyfriend and i find out the cure is your own blood? oh the sweet ironic revenge.
 
Whether it's right or wrong, I sure to enjoy watching it. Their chemistry is just so tense & exciting, I love their scenes together.
 
Why couldn't the scene end up like a spuffy scene.

Fight...Fight...Fight... and then hot sex

it would have been much better then the killing. Make love not war!

Course I'm just joking (even though that would have been really really really hot to watch).

I think that Buffy was both a bit right and a bit wrong. Yes Faith was becoming very dangerous and all and Buffy deffended herself but I mean Willow also cross the line of no coming back in season 6 and they still found a way to keep her alive and to bring her back

I never saw Faith as a big bad. I think that overall she was just scared and lost. Buffy had her mom, Giles and her Friends to teach her the right and the wrong. Faith never had all those things so when the mayor came she thought that she was doing the right things by fallowing him. I think that maybe Buffy should have considered this a bit more. I mean Faith was very unstable and it wasn't a reason to kill her

-Blaze-
 
I have to say Buffy's character does annoy me sometimes, especially in the last 2 seasons. She does think that she is above everyone else morally. (I know some people will really oppose my view: king 🙂 Personally I don't think she is, especially as the show progresses. She has a few times shown willingness to kill humans, twice with Faith. In Angel's Sanctuary she threatens to beat Faith to death, I think she really means it.
For me theres no difference between killing an evil demon and killing an evil human who is involved in the supernatural world.
The problem for me however, is the fact that Buffy doesn't seem to acknowledge the fact that she has tried to kill a human being. Just because Faith didn't die doesn't mean that you didn't intend to kill her.
In season 4 she doesn't stake Spike, I know he has a chip and they wanted to keep his character on the show, but I would have staked him to make sure know one got hurt again. It's kind of double standards:: vampire

You can all kill me now if you like for talking bad about Buffy:biggrin2:
 
Okie dokie, I'm going to try and not choke myself with prejudice on this one. Keep my post 13 shades of chocolateness. Yay! 😀

It's pretty concrete that what Buffy did was wrong, and I would try to justify her actions with what she had going against anorexic self. But, Faith was human.. the obvious denote of slayer strength, so what. Okay, not so what. She was in the Twilight Zone, but you do not kill someone in the Whedonverse just because they're way off the bandwagon. If you're going with that logic, Buffy should have killed herself many MANY times, and Dawn just for the kicks; that's besides the point. She knew clearly what she had to do for herself (all the Angel blah, it would satisfy her need in the end), but the dwarf-sized amount of remorse she held afterwards? Ughhh, someone douse my boxers non-flammable liquid.

sibby said:
Im not a massive fan of Faith so GO BUFFY!
Click to expand...

*slaps* Eat snuff. Mwuahahaha, I play with you. See? Play. - - - > :chainsaw:
 
I'll try and not be blinded by my love for Faith here. 😉

Pot calling kettle, much? Is what I would have said if Buffy killed Faith. The whole reason Faith was rogue in the first place was because she accidently killed someone, if Buffy intentionally killed Faith, it would be a whole new level. I don't think Giles would have been to happy, or any of the other Scoobies, even if they did dislike Faith. And like Faith said in Graduation Day Part 1, if Buffy kills her, she becomes her. I'm not sure if she even would have gone through with it anyway, even if she didn't like Faith all that much anymore, I think guilt would have eaten away at her.
 
I've always seen her decision as a defense-motivated decision, and not as revenge. While it's true that in the human world, self-defense is usually something on which you have to decide in the moment, in this case we had a mystical poison that kills vampires unless they drain a slayer - not exactly a situation for which human law has precedent or case history. But it is made clear that draining a slayer is the only thing that will cure angel, so given the choice between killing herself or *the person who infected him with the poison in the first place*, Buffy chose that person's life over her own. (Though obviously she later risked her own when Faith's was no longer an option for curing Angel.) I think it's made pretty clear that her seeking out faith and fighting her is motivated by trying to cure angel and not by getting faith's murdering (in general) under control or taking revenge on her.

Think of an analogy where you are walking with a loved one and two would-be murders attack the two of you and the one with a gun points it at your beloved and makes it clear is planning to pull the trigger. You don't have time to grab the gun, but you have time to either jump in front of the bullet, letting yourself get killed to protect your beloved, or shoving the other murderer in front of the bullet, so that the murderer gets killed instead of your loved one. Although it would be a conscious choice, it is not immoral to shove the murderer in front of the bullet rather than jumping there yourself. From my perspective, that is basically what Buffy did. She reasoned, correctly, that Faith was the one who poisoned Angel to try to kill him and distract Buffy, thus putting them in a situation where a slayer needs to be drained. It was not immoral for Buffy to chose to let him drain Faith rather than herself, and not revenge - it was defense of a loved one. The time lag is only a result of the mystical situations that occur on the show, but doesn't make it any less about self-defense than if it had occurred in fast time in the human world as in the analogy above.
 
I understand why she wanted to do it but that doesn't make it right. In the end she couldn't give Angel Faiths blood so she sacrificed her own. And she survived it. Of course they didn't know that before and yeah Faith was the one who shot him but I just don't think she had the right to sacrifice Faith.

Yes, Faith has super- power. But to me she is still human just like Buffy is. Warren was human and in my opinion much worse than Faith ever was because his intentions were so much different. But Buffy thought he didn't deserve death and Faith did. Warren wanted the power. He liked the way killing made him feel. Faith just lost her way. Of course there is no excuse for all the stuff she did but I can understand it. In her whole life she had nobody. And then for the first time suddenly there is someone (the mayor) who sees something in her. Who thinks she's special. Who loves her. And I think that's also a reason why she went over to the dark side.

And I also think Angel was right in helping her. Buffys anger was justified too of course. But unlike so many killers (like Warren) Faith wanted to make up for the things she did. And just like Giles once said:

"To forgive is an act of compassion, Buffy. It's not done because people deserve it. It's done because they need it."

Of course, a lot of people disagree and that's okay. It's just my opinion. And if we'd all agree it wouldn't be that much fun!

Well, in the end everything worked out great between the two of them so I'm happy :biggrin:
 
I did understand where Buffy was coming from at first. Even if Angel hadn't gotten hit with that poisoned dart, Buffy would probably have felt that killing Faith was a necessity eventually...even though she was technically a human, she was a killer, and, if she wasn't stopped, the chances were that a lot of other innocent lives would be taken in her place.

But then, when season 6 rolled around and she was so insistent on not killing Warren, I started to question her reasons for killing Faith. If she had been following her season 6 morals, she probably would have either fed herself to Angel first or let him die (after all, he was a demon, even if he did have a soul) and dealt with Faith in a more humane way. Now, I suppose you could argue that she didn't consider prison first because, as Wesley said, they were ill-equipped to hold someone with Slayer strength against their will, but she did know that the Watchers' Council wanted to lock her up...she could have given her to them. But instead, she let her love for Angel cloud her judgment and decided that he was worth more than a human life.

So basically, I do believe that Buffy was justified in killing Faith, but her decision definitely did go against her own preconceived morals.
 
But the difference between not wanting to kill Warren vs. being willing to sacrifice Faith's life to save Angel is exactly because the latter was *not* motivated by revenge, but by self-defense (of a loved one). Killing Warren couldn't save Tara's life, whereas letting Faith be drained by Angel could save his life, and his life was endangered by Faith in the first place. It was not about deciding that she couldn't be reformed - it was self-defense. Once that moment was over and Buffy no longer had the choice of sacrificing Angel's attempted murderer to save his life, she then decided to try curing him herself, but only after Faith curing him was no longer an option. She didn't try to murder faith in later seasons out of revenge - only in season 3 when she thought that bringing her to angel would cure him.
 
but killing a lost and helpless Faith (ok not so helpless but you get what I mean) to save a vampire, soul or no soul, wasn't exactly right
 
MinwaraYana
MinwaraYana
Yay! killing your true love is wrong. lol ^^
I think at that point. FAITH DESERVED TO DIE. Wait a minute!! Not my thought, not my thought! I mean, I think that what Buffy thinks at that point. She might thinks "Faith poisoned Angel so she's the one to pay it".

p.s. just so u know, I love Faith
 
Blaze
Blaze
lol, you'd better love Faith ;)
personaly i think it wasnt right for buffy to try and kill Faith for the reasons she did but I think if buffy had not tryed to save angel trough killing Faith she would have got really out of hand with the killing and the general evil biddings of the mayor, even though thats probably not what was going through her head at the time, she inidvertantly saved Faith from going too far and trying to kill her was the only way to do it. Faith would never listen to anyone who was trying to show her the errors of her ways but as it shows in the tv series being in the coma changed her and allowed her to go on the path of redemption................in the end
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom