Was it wrong not to stake Spike?

[EuroBirdV8]

i think buffy let him, cause he was harmless.
a season later he was the protector of Dawn.

so buffy did well to let spike alive...

 

[LadyLavinia]

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.

Giles had no problems with killing an innocent like Ben. Nor did he have a problem with insisting upon Buffy killing Dawn. Buffy . . . DID. This is why Giles never told Buffy that he had killed Ben.

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?


Xander WAS NOT that civil to Spike during S5. Even after Buffy's return from the dead, he wasn't that civil. He didn't become civil to Spike, until S7; when he realized that Spike was being manipulated by the First Evil.

And I DO BLAME Xander for trying to kill Spike in "Entropy". He had no right to do so. Spike could not protect himself. And Xander wanted to kill him for having sex with Anya . . . after he had dumped her at the altar. What in the hell did he expect? For her to sit around and mope longingly after him for all eternity? And Spike was not the only one who had attempted to rape Buffy. As I recall, Xander tried to rape her in S1. You can use the excuse that he was "possessed" at the time. But gee . . . wouldn't that be the equivalent of a soulless vampire?


What is it about human beings that they try to find an excuse to kill anyone they consider different (aka "dangerous") from themselves? It's just another version of harming others, due to some form of bigotry toward those who are different. If Buffy or the Scoobies had killed Spike when he was chipped and incapable of defending himself, then any of them would have been guilty of cold-blooded murder.

This argument that Buffy should have killed a chipped Spike only tells me a lot about people. That we're still aggressive and bigoted enough to harm someone whom we consider different from ourselves. That we're still capable of bigotry on a massive scale.

 

[Icarium]

And I DO BLAME Xander for trying to kill Spike in “Entropy”. He had no right to do so.

Of course he has. Spike is a serial murderer who cannot really be sent to jail. The reason for dusting Spike at that particular point was idiotic, sure, but the right is clearly on Xander's side.

What is it about human beings that they try to find an excuse to kill anyone they consider different (aka “dangerous”) from themselves? It’s just another version of harming others, due to some form of bigotry toward those who are different. If Buffy or the Scoobies had killed Spike when he was chipped and incapable of defending himself, then any of them would have been guilty of cold-blooded murder.

Murder implies killing. Spike is already dead. Also, the argument of him being helpless hinges on him remaining so indefinitely. Can Buffy really take such a risk? Remember, the price of a mistake would be many innocent lives? Why take such a risk for the sake of a killing machine metaphysically incapable of being good?

This argument that Buffy should have killed a chipped Spike only tells me a lot about people. That we're still aggressive and bigoted enough to harm someone whom we consider different from ourselves. That we're still capable of bigotry on a massive scale.

Might as well claim it's bigoted to execute serial murderers then...

 

[Tara Maclay]

I think she felt too bad to stake him. He couldn't defend himself so she didn't want to kill him. Also, it was essential to the plot for him to be not dead. Otherwise no Spike and Buffy.

 

[JCoatsworth]

I think they should have staked him.
Don't get this wrong, I think he's really cool!

But he's a vampire (without a soul!) and it's the slayer's duty to slay his kind.
He tried to kill them plenty of times and that would have been the best possibility to finish it.
He's a big danger and they knew (at least I hope they did😀) that once the chip would have been gone he would have tried again.

But still I think the reason why they never killed him was that the chip made him more human.
And it would have been inhumane for them to kill someone that's nearly a human.

Also I don't think it was wrong to not stake him, but it would have been right to do it.

 

[Nightcrawler]

His coolness got to Buffy and the rest lol...i think they saw him as pathedic and he wouldn't do anything to them.

I thought for sure he was going to get staked when he tried to rape Buffy buuut nope...it was a big mistake and he regrets it...guys like a puppy that pees on the carpet...You wanna hit the puppy with a newspaper...but meh lol

Is it wrong of me when Spike came to Buffy in her backyard with a shotgun that i kinda 'woo hooed' alittle? then i was like awwww cause it was cute?:3

 

[Daniel Osbourne]

The Scoobies didn't stake Spike for the same reason they don't slaughter the demons at Willy's: they're not posing an ongoing threat to human society.

Also, as Willow comments, it's icky 'cause they know him. Spike is far more of a person to the Scoobies, and it would be immensely uncomfortable for both the characters and audience to kill him even if he were to lose the chip and begin a murder spree. He's not a two-bit villain like Luke. He's a guy who likes Puddlemere United and crackers in his cuppa blood. Slaying him would be icky like Buffy having to kill Anya in Selfless was icky.

Bottom line? If Spike's out and killing people of his own free will, Buffy should stake him A.S.A.P., but it would be uncomfortable, since he's so human. If Spike's chipped, let him be, because slaying him then would be kinda mean. Thank goodness it worked out the way it did!

 

[OhWow]

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.

WOAH? Spike threatened to rape Willow? What did I miss?

 

[sisterofmercy]

I think on a technical basis, yes they should have staked him when they had the chance, especially after they found out he was helping Adam. That being said though, I'm very glad they didn't as he's one of my favourite characters.