Was it wrong not to stake Spike?

[BuffyElevated]

I'm with you... I really think it was irresponsible for Buffy not to stake Spike. If they have no problem killing people like Ben, who are completely innocent, she should have had no problem staking Spike.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

There are many factors that helped that. Xander was depressed after leaving Anya, he hated himself and Spike was his punching bag, seeing Spike screwing Anya drove him nuts, so it wasn't much of hate as it was about anger and acting before thinking.

I also recall Xander acting outright civil to Spike in Season 5. I think there's truth in the statement that Xander started to dislike Spike far more after the AR. It was always about Buffy. Xander has always hated most vampires - but what Spike did to Buffy made it personal.

I'm not blaming or even questioning what Xander did in 'Entropy.' His rage was understandable. Do you honestly think, though, that if Buffy hadn't been there that Xander would have stopped himself from hacking Spike's head off with that hatchet?

I have to disagree with you there. Xander was quite understanding at the thought of Buffy sleeping with Spike in Intervention. He asked Spike not to hurt Buffy, told Buffy that he wasn't judging her, and later told Buffy to go easy on Spike because Glory had hurt him a lot.

True, he was far more understandthing than even Willow and Tara were.

It all comes to the state of his mind, S5 Xander was more level-headed and happy. S6 Xander was depressed, filled with self-loathing and regret, drinking his sorrows away.

Fair enough. But regardless of the reason, Xander's feeling for Spike drastically changed between Season 5 and Season 6.

I'd love to see them talk, now, after all that has happened.

 

[Ojuice5001]

And of course, Willow and Xander went farther than just not staking him, when they prevented him from committing suicide. That's taking the valuation of Spike's undead life to a higher extreme; and Buffy was a little skeptical when they told her this.

 

[white avenger]

Has everyone forgotten the bargain that Spike struck with Buffy and the Scoobies? In exchange for blood, even pigs' blood, and shelter, Spike would give them vital information about the Initiative, information that they considered very important. Once the bargain was struck, neither Buffy nor any of her friends could stake Spike without betraying that trust.

Plus, I'm relatively sure that his new "defanged vampire" status would have made them reluctant to stake him anyhow.

 

[Icarium]

Has everyone forgotten the bargain that Spike struck with Buffy and the Scoobies? In exchange for blood, even pigs' blood, and shelter, Spike would give them vital information about the Initiative, information that they considered very important. Once the bargain was struck, neither Buffy nor any of her friends could stake Spike without betraying that trust.

A few episodes later Buffy is already Riley's girlfriend and a part of the Iniative and knows a lot more about said Initiative than Spike. Even when it's clear Spike can't provide no more useful information he isn't staked, so obviously this isn't the reason.

It's all extremely contrived and silly, really. Not only do neither of the scoobies dust Spike but even the Sunnydale "demon community" lets him go with just a warning ("Goodbye Iowa"). The supposedly ruthless and rigid Watcher's Council also ignores the threat he poses, never mind we are talking about the same people who tried to kill Angel despite his soul and have no rason whatsoever to trust some chip made by some government organization which turned out to be a bit on the evil side. Come to think of, neither do the Scoobies, yet they do.

Plus, I'm relatively sure that his new "defanged vampire" status would have made them reluctant to stake him anyhow.

Why? Buffy didn't hesitate to kill Baltazar who he couldn't move. Spike is supposedly helpless but who knows how long this will be and what opportunities to do evil he would have even if the chip works? Does a vicious murderer deserve any benefit of a doubt? Buffy has been there and done that. She gave a chance to Angel, Many people died as a result of that. You would think she would do everything possible to prevent a repetition of that. I think it's very much OOC that neither of the Scoobs decided it's too much of a risk to rely on the chip to keep Spike neutered.

But hey, the writers liked Spike, so they had everyone become stupid around him. Classic case of plot trumping character development.

 

[MysticMisfit]

Has everyone forgotten the bargain that Spike struck with Buffy and the Scoobies? In exchange for blood, even pigs' blood, and shelter, Spike would give them vital information about the Initiative, information that they considered very important.

Wasn't he mostly BSing about having "inside info" with them though, even before he got in cahoots with what's-his-ugly-face... Adam?

I always thought it'd be interesting to explore what Joss and the team might have had in store for Spike had they not come up with the chip idea. I mean obviously the idea was to keep Marsters on since the fans responded the way they did, but he still wasn't the Big Bad in S4 or in general anymore. He probably would have gotten staked by Season five at the latest, or he might have just been this constant source of stress for the gang. (He kinda was anyway, lol.) Any thoughts on that?

 

[Tsquared]

Why wasn't Angel staked? He had a soul yes, but it could easily have been removed by numerous "side effects", loopholes, and enemies. He was just as dangerous as S2 Spike, maybe even more. They both lived because of Buffy, Spike maybe for a different reason.

I do have a theory, though, as to why they didn't stake him. I don't think Buffy could have killed something that couldn't fight back, even if it was a vampire like Spike. He wouldn't have been able to defend himself, and in her eyes, it probably would have felt wrong, even if it was more or less the right thing to do.

And I pretty much second this on why. 🙂

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Why wasn't Angel staked? He had a soul yes, but it could easily have been removed by numerous "side effects", loopholes, and enemies. He was just as dangerous as S2 Spike, maybe even more. They both lived because of Buffy, Spike maybe for a different reason.

I've thought about this, specially before it was mentioned (by Wes?) that perfect happiness is rare and I was worried about Angel losing his soul.

And I actually think that Angel was a lot less likely to turn evil than the humans of Sunnydale. They take awalk through the park in the middle of the night, they could turn into a meal or be sired. Angel only seemed to be able to lose his soul when he was perfectly happy, and I don't think the scoobies (maybe Xander) thought that loophole was all that risky, since he was often seen miserable. And his enemies were probably thought to be more likely to stake him than go through the trouble of making him lose his soul, which for all they knew wouldn't make him less able to kick their butts.

So all in all, I don't think the scoobies (except Xander) wanted to kill a currectly harmless creature who would give his life up for them, specially since any other Sunnydale citizen might be more likely to lose their souls.

 

[Icarium]

I've thought about this, specially before it was mentioned (by Wes?) that perfect happiness is rare and I was worried about Angel losing his soul.

And I actually think that Angel was a lot less likely to turn evil than the humans of Sunnydale. They take awalk through the park in the middle of the night, they could turn into a meal or be sired. Angel only seemed to be able to lose his soul when he was perfectly happy, and I don't think the scoobies (maybe Xander) thought that loophole was all that risky, since he was often seen miserable. And his enemies were probably thought to be more likely to stake him than go through the trouble of making him lose his soul, which for all they knew wouldn't make him less able to kick their butts.

So all in all, I don't think the scoobies (except Xander) wanted to kill a currectly harmless creature who would give his life up for them, specially since any other Sunnydale citizen might be more likely to lose their souls.

The problem with that reasoning that if an average citizen is vamped this is tragic but hardly a threat for Buffy and the gang. If Angel goes evil again though, chances are he would learn from his previous experience and get rid of Buffy and Willow ASAP and considering they probably won't suspect a thing this should be a very easy thing to do. Also, Angel doesn't lose he is soul when he is happy, some mage can do it by using an illusion to make Angel think he is perfectly happy, so as much Angel is prone to brooding this is always a possibility.

The obvious thing to do would be to research ways to remove the loophole of the curse but this would have meant no Angel spin-off, so it couldn't happen.

 

[Summerlilly]

I love it when characters are all of a sudden part of the family....like it was always that way! I definately remember thinking....Why the hell are they letting Spike live? It was like all of a sudden since he wasn't an immediate threat they could just pretend he'd been around for a while. Plus, Buffy had better things on her mind...like a hottie named Riley. 🙂 But, why in the hell didn't Xander kick him out earlier?!! I mean, he coould have when he found out about the chip right?

 

[Anya2012]

before I begin i just want to say im a huge spike fan!
He's one of the only cool english charechter out their (as is Giles/Ripper) so i am in no way saying 'I wish they had staked him!' so please all you spike fans dont dive on me

Wasnt it irresponsible for buffy THE SLAYER, not to stake spike. a old big bad, when he came to them saying he was chipped. for all they knew he was lying and just waiting for a chance to strike. i think it was very out of charechter that buffy didnt slay him, what do you guys think?

Altought im glad she didnt, spike rocks! 😛

The same thing could be said for Angel when he lost his soul in season two.

 

[Taake]

The same thing could be said for Angel when he lost his soul in season two.

True but Buffy herself did know that that was irresponsible of her, she was just too emotionally tied to him and she did feel ashamed when e.g. he killed her classmate Teresa. So it wasn't as if she thought it was all right not to have done it.

Spike got sort of a get-out-of-jail free card there, she kind of joked about staking him but never seemed serious about doing so when perhaps she should have.

 

[Thursday]

I think for all practical purposes Spike should've been staked. I wish the writers would've had Riley go through with it S5 because just having Riley stake Spike without killing him was, IMO, kinda silly.

 

[MinwaraYana]

I understand about them not staking Spike after S4. Especially in Buffy's case. She might think he's not worth killing. I mean, he was chipped. Buffy might have some Slayer ego. She's like "He can't hurt me. If I kill him, that means I'm a loser because I kill a vampire who can't fight back". 😀

What I don't understand is, in S2. Buffy had too many chances to dust him. In Halloween, after she became herself again. She beated him a little and then just stood there and smiled the winning smile while he's running away.

 

[LadyLavinia]

Wow! Memories are short. Have so many actually forgotten that Spike tried to kill Willow in "The Initiative" a few times . . . and failed? That was how they knew that the chip did work.

 

[Willow My Love]

The same thing could be said for Angel when he lost his soul in season two.

Eventually, Buffy did kill Angel.

She didn't kill Spike because he wasn't worth her time and energy. As she says in Fool For Love, "You're beneath me."

 

[Username]

Was it wrong not to stake Spike? Yes.
There was no reason for Buffy not to do it, other than what that she felt it was wrong because he had a chip in his head? that didn't keep him from helping Adam.
They couldn't of trusted that the chip was going to last forever, they should have staked him when they had the chance, when he was chained to Giles' bathtub not doing anything. And he even wanted to die in Doomed and they still wouldn't do it, that is BS..

 

[kadrikaur]

She didn't kill Spike 'cause he's hot and she's been in love with him since School Hard.

Okay, obviously not true. I think that there is no reasonable explanation for why she didn't kill him. It's just that the fan response for Spike was good and so they decided to keep him around.

Although I truly like Spike and everything about him, I believe that it was wrong for Buffy not to kill him, with Spike being evil and a vampire.
But on the other hand, they had spent quite the time together - plotting against Angelus and fighting against each other, so maybe she just tought that life would get broing without him around? And she liked his peroxyde hair.

I think I'm going to stick Buffy not killing Spike 'cause he's hot.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

I think they should have. As soon as it turned out he knew nothing useful, they should have killed him.

Buffy should have because she's perfectly fine with staking evil massmurderers.
Anya should have, to protect Xander. It seems weird that she didn't.
Xander should have, but both he and Willow can be excused, they were still young and innocent(okay, Willow is just stupid for caring for Spike, after he threatened to rape her in Lover's walk and tried to turn her in season 4). Same with Tara.
Giles is a killer and he kills when he has to. The younger members of the Scoobie gang could be excused, but he's seen too much death to not take Spike seriously.

They let themselves believe he was safe, even tough he mentioned nothing about redemption(not until he feel in love with Buffy anyway), and the chip could stop working any time (or he could kill innocent demons or hold the scoobies while another demon killed them for him). And after him banding together with Adam, they all knew damn well what damage he could do.

I think it's extremely out of character for the entire gang to ignore the danger. So I blame the writers. They wanted to keep Spike around, so they had the scoobies accept him way too easily.

Don't get me wrong, I love his development as a character, but everytime I watch a scene reminding me that they let him live, I grind my teeth.

Btw, my slayage is 666. Mohahaha.

I agree with everything you've said.

 

[The Unspoken]

The chip puts Spike in an interesting place. On the one hand, he can't attack humans, so he's basically harmless and certainly not remotely as dangerous as a 'normal' homicidal human, like Warren, whose live Buffy and co. refused to take because he was still human. On the other hand, because of his vampire nature Spike has even less qualms about taking lives than said 'normal' homicidal human. He resorts to scheming and manipulating in order to harm people rather than doing it directly.