Why do you think the author chose Harry Potter did not kill voldemort? Was it because harry was "a good guy" so would not could not kill? or?

[strateguy632]

Consider Harry did kill quirrel, in self defense, also ma of ginny and ron weasley killed bellatrix when she was attacking, so why not write harry killed bad voldemort.

Harry and his 2 wands against voldemort

was this a choice and if so why? or no option because the film was a documentary where harry could kill him but the event was he did not?

Updates

+1 y

i refer to the time of the last duel when v' had elder wand.

[far2gud4u]

Harry was one of the things keeping Voldemort alive. I feel like you haven't understood the point of a horcrux... It meant as long as his soul was latched to that he could always survive. Harry was the final horcrux so voldemort had to AK curse Harry to kill the last bit of him as Voldemort didn't know Harry was a horcrux. Once the snake (the last horcrux) was killed it left Voldemort killable. At no point could you have changed this story or had Harry kill Voldemort earlier.

[strateguy632]

earlier? but if "killable" after snake, why harry NOT kill. unless you meant your reply to my mytake, not here?

[far2gud4u]

Harry did kill him... He was the Elder wands true master so Voldemort could not use it to kill him. Instead it rebounds Voldemorts curse and kills him. It just means Harry does kill him but by an Expelliarmus charm he previously cast which made the wand Harry's and Harry doesn't have to use a killing charm (therefore goodness beating evil and getting his karma)

[Anonymous]

I agree with you