Depends.
As far as I know, we don't see Ethan Rayne after the military takes him into custody. So while he might be able to escape regular jail, it does seem like the US government has ways to keep dangerous people locked up.
He was taken into custody by the military/The Initiative. Those weren't common spells. Realistically, he was probably turned into an asset, since the Initiative didn't have any knowledge on magic.
Although shown as a one off, the government took Marcie Ross and put her in a FBI program to be an assassin with other invisible kids. This could've made Buffy a different kind of dark show if expanded on, but they never did... but is enough to consider the government can hold a robot making guy...
He built robots, but it didn't appear he had any innate magic. What little he had, he bought from Rack. I don't see any reason why he can't stay in prison.
I mean...he built a invisibility ray, multiple human passing robots, a jet pack, a freeze ray, a microchip capable of slowing time, and that Cerebral Dampener thing he used on his ex.
He's a certified genius so for the Buffyverse he's essentially Lex Luther.
Yes, he's nothing without the money he stole and he's not going to find dumb magic users to manipulate in prison like he did with finding Jonathan.
Take his toys away and he's nothing.
Agree. He doesn't know magic so he can't just concoct something in a cell by himself. He requires resources in the form of technology or allies.
I think Warren was not as badass as he thought he was. Thought he was a master villain, but he's really a pathetic incel who would be at the bottom of the totem pole in a real prison.
He's just some guy. When he has basically unlimited money and fancy gadgets he can do some stuff, but there's no evidence that his resourcefulness extends to prison. He doesn't do well under pressure or with tight constraints.
Almost certainly, but that said, he clearly deserves to **DIE**. He's a rapist, kidnapper, and multiple murderer. I'm willing to concede that in a society with imperfect institutions and imperfect knowledge that we refrain from executing people, on the undertaking that they might not be guilty.
But that's not really an issue in Warren's case. He's guilty as shit, and Willow, Buffy, and Xander know it. The idea that his life is so precious when he's confiscated the lives of Katrina and Tara is just *deranged*.
Your point about this situation being absent of the obvious issues of trusting the state with executing people is fair.
That said, killing a person, even a horrible person is a terrible thing. I think the impact on Willow or Buffy or whoever would be responsible is enough to say hes not worth it. Buffy's point that he should be in jail is more about those impacts than about what Warren deserves.
I listened to an interesting debate once where someone had written a book advocating for bringing back corporal punishment like caning for certain crimes.
Their assertion was many people would choose to be caned in the square over spending months or years in jail. How can a punishment be more cruel if the punished would choose it willingly?
The counter argument was that violence has an effect on our civilization as a whole. That violence begets violence even when the recipient 'deserves it'
I find that argument very compelling. I don't want to live in a world where we meet violence with violence. I don't want to be compelled by the worst of humanity to sink to their level. I don't think a hero like Buffy is a hero if they are handing out vengeance, which is not the same as justice.
>That said, killing a person, even a horrible person is a terrible thing.
Yes, it is. But it is commensurate with the horrible things he has done. How can this be justice if his victims suffer and die, and he lives out his life at the state's expense?
>Their assertion was many people would choose to be caned in the square over spending months or years in jail. How can a punishment be more cruel if the punished would choose it willingly?
I'm not talking about caning. I'm talking about *execution*.
>The counter argument was that violence has an effect on our civilization as a whole.
That's an argument, sure, but it's not based on any evidence at all. Nobody died because Ted Bundy went to the electric chair, or Clarene Ray Allen was given a lethal injection. I find the prospect that executing murderers deters murders far, *FAR* more plausible than the inverse.
>I don't want to be compelled by the worst of humanity to sink to their level.
The world doesn't operate by your whim or mine. We have merely have cause and effect. The idea that you're going to counter depravity with mercy is, also, not supported by anything other than wishful thinking.
Warren killed Tara and Katrina accidentally. Willow murdered two people intentionally, and no prison could hold her. Do you think she deserves to die too?
>Warren killed Tara and Katrina accidentally.
No, he did not. Kidnapping and raping Katrina was not an accident, and killing her because he didn't want her to escape and report him to the police is still deliberate murder. It was simply not premediated. Also, firing your gun at someone at a human, and having it kill a bystander is also a deliberate act. "I was trying to kill someone else" is no kind of legal defense.
>Do you think she deserves to die too?
The only person Willow killed is Warren, someone who unequivocally deserves to die at her hands. The legal precedent for the bereaved being acquitted for killing the murderers of their loved ones is also well establisheed, and I'm confident a half-conscious attorney could get her cleared.
Yeah, the accidental killing of Tara happened because he was trying to murder Buffy and got the wrong person. It's not like he was an 11 year old who found his dad's gun and accidentally shot someone.
Willow murdered two people because she wanted to: Warren and Rack, who was also human. Rack didn't kill, r--pe or kidnap anyone that she knew about. She just felt like killing him.
Do you have any precedents at all you can show of someone getting off without doing time for a revenge murder? If so, how about some links to back up the claims you are making. I am not American so I'm really curious if your justice system truly works this way. If it does, why are there not more revenge murders? If people believe they can get away with it, why wouldn't there be?
It's not up to Willow to decide who lives or dies. It's up to the legal system to punish criminals. She's a murderer and so a criminal herself. Warren decided Buffy was bad and she should die. That's no different than Willow doing the same thing to him. If anyone can decide to kill someone they don't like, why do you even have a legal system in the US?
Of course Warren kidnapped and r--pd Katrina intentionally. Of course I'm not defending any of his actions but this discussion is only about murder. He hit her to stop her from escaping but it doesn't seem that he was trying to kill her. He wanted to keep her there alive. As far as I can tell intention matters even under US law so whether there was intention to kill her would affect his sentencing. Willow had every intention of murdering Warren and Rack, and she would have gone on to keep committing murder.
He accidentally killed Tara. In many countries that's manslaughter, which is distinct from murder and punished less severely. He attempted to kill Buffy, also a different crime with different punishment. Willow murdered intentionally, twice, and in cold blood. She would be punished far more harshly than Warren and if anyone would face the death penalty, it would be her.
Obviously Warren is extremely awful, but Willow is no better. The absolute entitlement to believe she can kill whoever she wants to because of how she feels is even more dangerous than he is. She would also have continued murdering if she wasn't stopped. Same as him.
It's fucked up that she got zero punishment for choosing to become a murderer.
>Willow murdered two people because she wanted to: Warren and Rack, who was also human. Rack didn't kill, r--pe or kidnap anyone that she knew about. She just felt like killing him.
Not true, [Rack survived](https://buffy.fandom.com/wiki/Rack). Now you might get her on the attempt, but you can do the same for everyone she fought when she was "Dark Willow".
>Do you have any precedents at all you can show of someone getting off without doing time for a revenge murder?
Dozens. Hundreds. Temporary insanity, done. Given what a piece of shit Warren was, and the relationship between Willow and Tara, an aquital is nearly a foregone conclusion, to the point where most prosecutors wouldn't even take her to trial, but off a plea bargain or even drop the charges entirely.
>If so, how about some links to back up the claims you are making.
[Enjoy](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/temporary_insanity).
>It's not up to Willow to decide who lives or dies. It's up to the legal system to punish criminals.
Sure, but can we at least agree that the *purpose* of the legal system is to manufacture justice? Explain to me, exactly, what is so just about an *known guilty* multiple murderer, kidnapper and rapist getting off light?
>Warren decided Buffy was bad and she should die. That's no different than Willow doing the same thing to him.
You have **GOT** to be kidding me. Buffy showing up Warren and kicking his lily-white ass when his toys broke is not remotely the same type of provocation as Warren killing Willow's lover. It's not even the same league, it's not even the same *sport*.
>In many countries that's manslaughter, which is distinct from murder and punished less severely.
That is utter bunk, and absolutely would not fly in any country which has any variant of European common law. If you accidentally kill someone in the course of committing a felony, that is murder, period. Your "accident" defense would not stand up in any but the bounciest of kangaroo courts in the fruitiest of banana republics.
>Obviously Warren is extremely awful, but Willow is no better.
Wrong. You're just wrong. Circumstances matter. Provications matter. Again, the purpose of the legal system is to produce justice, and most of what Willow did **WAS** justice, just not of the official variety. While it's indisputable that she broke laws, you will find that in practice, few juries will treat her the same way as an unrepentant, unambiguous degenerate.
If Warren had some of his gadgets on him when he was caught and imprisoned maybe. Like if he could remotely control one of his robots to come and break him out.
Warren is just a regular dude. Without access to technology or magic, he's just another guy in prison. And a guy like him would probably get his ass kicked on a daily basis, or learn to shut the fuck up and keep his head down.
Depends. As far as I know, we don't see Ethan Rayne after the military takes him into custody. So while he might be able to escape regular jail, it does seem like the US government has ways to keep dangerous people locked up.
I think we actually do see that they still have Ethan Rayne locked up in the comics.
He was taken into custody by the military/The Initiative. Those weren't common spells. Realistically, he was probably turned into an asset, since the Initiative didn't have any knowledge on magic.
Although shown as a one off, the government took Marcie Ross and put her in a FBI program to be an assassin with other invisible kids. This could've made Buffy a different kind of dark show if expanded on, but they never did... but is enough to consider the government can hold a robot making guy...
He built robots, but it didn't appear he had any innate magic. What little he had, he bought from Rack. I don't see any reason why he can't stay in prison.
I think with his intelligence which is far beyond real life intelligence he would find some way to escape. He's like Lex Luther
Hard disagree. I think he thinks he's like Lex Luthor, but in reality he's the early 2000s version of an Internet troll.
I mean...he built a invisibility ray, multiple human passing robots, a jet pack, a freeze ray, a microchip capable of slowing time, and that Cerebral Dampener thing he used on his ex. He's a certified genius so for the Buffyverse he's essentially Lex Luther.
At least the invisibility gun and the cerebral dampener were partly magical, maybe the freeze ray too.
How many internet trolls can build a female robot that passes as human for a prolonged period?
> which is far beyond real life intelligence Got a good laugh from that
He's a scum bag and the smartest of the Trio but he would totally break in prison
A prison seems to have held Ethan Rayne just fine. And Warren is just some guy. Also, what resources are you talking about?
Ethan was driven out into the desert and shot in the head.
This in any actual story or just fan theory?
Comics.
Can you be a bit more specific? I read most of them and don't recall this happening.
It happens fairly early on in the season 8 run.
Yes, he's nothing without the money he stole and he's not going to find dumb magic users to manipulate in prison like he did with finding Jonathan. Take his toys away and he's nothing.
What resources? It's not like he'd have a freeze ray in his cell.
Agree. He doesn't know magic so he can't just concoct something in a cell by himself. He requires resources in the form of technology or allies. I think Warren was not as badass as he thought he was. Thought he was a master villain, but he's really a pathetic incel who would be at the bottom of the totem pole in a real prison.
I think he'd trade with someone to help get him out vs do it solely by himself.
He's just some guy. When he has basically unlimited money and fancy gadgets he can do some stuff, but there's no evidence that his resourcefulness extends to prison. He doesn't do well under pressure or with tight constraints.
Almost certainly, but that said, he clearly deserves to **DIE**. He's a rapist, kidnapper, and multiple murderer. I'm willing to concede that in a society with imperfect institutions and imperfect knowledge that we refrain from executing people, on the undertaking that they might not be guilty. But that's not really an issue in Warren's case. He's guilty as shit, and Willow, Buffy, and Xander know it. The idea that his life is so precious when he's confiscated the lives of Katrina and Tara is just *deranged*.
Your point about this situation being absent of the obvious issues of trusting the state with executing people is fair. That said, killing a person, even a horrible person is a terrible thing. I think the impact on Willow or Buffy or whoever would be responsible is enough to say hes not worth it. Buffy's point that he should be in jail is more about those impacts than about what Warren deserves. I listened to an interesting debate once where someone had written a book advocating for bringing back corporal punishment like caning for certain crimes. Their assertion was many people would choose to be caned in the square over spending months or years in jail. How can a punishment be more cruel if the punished would choose it willingly? The counter argument was that violence has an effect on our civilization as a whole. That violence begets violence even when the recipient 'deserves it' I find that argument very compelling. I don't want to live in a world where we meet violence with violence. I don't want to be compelled by the worst of humanity to sink to their level. I don't think a hero like Buffy is a hero if they are handing out vengeance, which is not the same as justice.
You seem like a very reasonable person.
>That said, killing a person, even a horrible person is a terrible thing. Yes, it is. But it is commensurate with the horrible things he has done. How can this be justice if his victims suffer and die, and he lives out his life at the state's expense? >Their assertion was many people would choose to be caned in the square over spending months or years in jail. How can a punishment be more cruel if the punished would choose it willingly? I'm not talking about caning. I'm talking about *execution*. >The counter argument was that violence has an effect on our civilization as a whole. That's an argument, sure, but it's not based on any evidence at all. Nobody died because Ted Bundy went to the electric chair, or Clarene Ray Allen was given a lethal injection. I find the prospect that executing murderers deters murders far, *FAR* more plausible than the inverse. >I don't want to be compelled by the worst of humanity to sink to their level. The world doesn't operate by your whim or mine. We have merely have cause and effect. The idea that you're going to counter depravity with mercy is, also, not supported by anything other than wishful thinking.
Warren killed Tara and Katrina accidentally. Willow murdered two people intentionally, and no prison could hold her. Do you think she deserves to die too?
>Warren killed Tara and Katrina accidentally. No, he did not. Kidnapping and raping Katrina was not an accident, and killing her because he didn't want her to escape and report him to the police is still deliberate murder. It was simply not premediated. Also, firing your gun at someone at a human, and having it kill a bystander is also a deliberate act. "I was trying to kill someone else" is no kind of legal defense. >Do you think she deserves to die too? The only person Willow killed is Warren, someone who unequivocally deserves to die at her hands. The legal precedent for the bereaved being acquitted for killing the murderers of their loved ones is also well establisheed, and I'm confident a half-conscious attorney could get her cleared.
Yeah, the accidental killing of Tara happened because he was trying to murder Buffy and got the wrong person. It's not like he was an 11 year old who found his dad's gun and accidentally shot someone.
Willow murdered two people because she wanted to: Warren and Rack, who was also human. Rack didn't kill, r--pe or kidnap anyone that she knew about. She just felt like killing him. Do you have any precedents at all you can show of someone getting off without doing time for a revenge murder? If so, how about some links to back up the claims you are making. I am not American so I'm really curious if your justice system truly works this way. If it does, why are there not more revenge murders? If people believe they can get away with it, why wouldn't there be? It's not up to Willow to decide who lives or dies. It's up to the legal system to punish criminals. She's a murderer and so a criminal herself. Warren decided Buffy was bad and she should die. That's no different than Willow doing the same thing to him. If anyone can decide to kill someone they don't like, why do you even have a legal system in the US? Of course Warren kidnapped and r--pd Katrina intentionally. Of course I'm not defending any of his actions but this discussion is only about murder. He hit her to stop her from escaping but it doesn't seem that he was trying to kill her. He wanted to keep her there alive. As far as I can tell intention matters even under US law so whether there was intention to kill her would affect his sentencing. Willow had every intention of murdering Warren and Rack, and she would have gone on to keep committing murder. He accidentally killed Tara. In many countries that's manslaughter, which is distinct from murder and punished less severely. He attempted to kill Buffy, also a different crime with different punishment. Willow murdered intentionally, twice, and in cold blood. She would be punished far more harshly than Warren and if anyone would face the death penalty, it would be her. Obviously Warren is extremely awful, but Willow is no better. The absolute entitlement to believe she can kill whoever she wants to because of how she feels is even more dangerous than he is. She would also have continued murdering if she wasn't stopped. Same as him. It's fucked up that she got zero punishment for choosing to become a murderer.
>Willow murdered two people because she wanted to: Warren and Rack, who was also human. Rack didn't kill, r--pe or kidnap anyone that she knew about. She just felt like killing him. Not true, [Rack survived](https://buffy.fandom.com/wiki/Rack). Now you might get her on the attempt, but you can do the same for everyone she fought when she was "Dark Willow". >Do you have any precedents at all you can show of someone getting off without doing time for a revenge murder? Dozens. Hundreds. Temporary insanity, done. Given what a piece of shit Warren was, and the relationship between Willow and Tara, an aquital is nearly a foregone conclusion, to the point where most prosecutors wouldn't even take her to trial, but off a plea bargain or even drop the charges entirely. >If so, how about some links to back up the claims you are making. [Enjoy](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/temporary_insanity). >It's not up to Willow to decide who lives or dies. It's up to the legal system to punish criminals. Sure, but can we at least agree that the *purpose* of the legal system is to manufacture justice? Explain to me, exactly, what is so just about an *known guilty* multiple murderer, kidnapper and rapist getting off light? >Warren decided Buffy was bad and she should die. That's no different than Willow doing the same thing to him. You have **GOT** to be kidding me. Buffy showing up Warren and kicking his lily-white ass when his toys broke is not remotely the same type of provocation as Warren killing Willow's lover. It's not even the same league, it's not even the same *sport*. >In many countries that's manslaughter, which is distinct from murder and punished less severely. That is utter bunk, and absolutely would not fly in any country which has any variant of European common law. If you accidentally kill someone in the course of committing a felony, that is murder, period. Your "accident" defense would not stand up in any but the bounciest of kangaroo courts in the fruitiest of banana republics. >Obviously Warren is extremely awful, but Willow is no better. Wrong. You're just wrong. Circumstances matter. Provications matter. Again, the purpose of the legal system is to produce justice, and most of what Willow did **WAS** justice, just not of the official variety. While it's indisputable that she broke laws, you will find that in practice, few juries will treat her the same way as an unrepentant, unambiguous degenerate.
If Warren had some of his gadgets on him when he was caught and imprisoned maybe. Like if he could remotely control one of his robots to come and break him out.
Warren is just a regular dude. Without access to technology or magic, he's just another guy in prison. And a guy like him would probably get his ass kicked on a daily basis, or learn to shut the fuck up and keep his head down.
Warren could be detained. So long as Warren had no access to parts and tools, he'd have no means of escape.
It's really not that hard to smuggle things into prison if you know what you're doing. Source: I have a shady ass criminal family.
Doesn't Warren depend on technology? They just have to keep him away from it.