In the end, George murdering his friend was well justified. Although, Lennie’s actions probably weren’t his fault, with him not being able to learn from his actions and remember that his own strength is too much for him that he became a threat. George, pained to do it, knew what was best for Lennie and other people/animals, and had to end his life. Overall, even though George had to make some pretty drastic decisions and someone’s life got taken away, it was all for the best and nothing bad will no longer happen and who knows, maybe George will get to live his
If Walter gets punished for this lion and other people don’t get punished for killing another lion, then Walter shouldn’t be punished for this. Disobeying the Lacey Act is something Walter Palmer did in Cecil the lion written by Matthew Drake. Walter should have been punished for killing the lion that has done no harm. He should be punished due to there being proof by the guide that he hired, he’s putting the cubs in danger, and he shouldn’t have killed the lion for no reason. Walter might be putting his career in danger, but he has to face the consequences.
The man also shows a sense of humility when he chooses to leave the rattlers on the snake. He could have chosen to keep these as proof of his heroic actions, however he chose to spare the snake’s own self-respect as if he had lived, ” I did not cut the rattles off for a trophy; I let him drop into the close green guardianship of the paper-bag bush.” One literary technique used is the structure of the piece. The author uses a structure that pulls the reader into the setting of the story. The story “The Rattler” creates a setting that creates the appeal by eye but also supports the sadness and remorse of the man. As the story reads through it creates a transition that focuses on what action is going on in the story.
While speaking to Whitney, he was a hunter and regarded the prey he hunted and killed as inferior in the parameters he set. His dismissal of the life he killed didn’t make him think as superior to them but it shows his contempt of life towards those he hunted. His perspective on killing might also have been drastically changed. When he was invited to the hunt by General Zaroff, he begged off and said that he was a hunter and not a murder. He views the killing of animals as acceptable but not killing of humans.
The only thing binding us to the law is fear of punishment or instinct, neither of which place a belief of right and wrong on a subject. The young person whom broke the law in order to act on the instinct that he must take the life of another did so because it felt like the correct thing to do. Even so, the law forbids him from murder, however, the law is also founded upon the sentiments of man. Each have the instinct
Surely, dying in a second was a better outcome for Lennie than being beat, hung, and finally dying after being tortured. When someone is left to watch another person, they have to keep them safe no matter what. This is seen everywhere- with parents and their children, teachers, and students, and so on. George protected Lennie until he ultimately decided that he had to shoot him for his own
This also shows that he cares for the littluns because after this line when jack say they 'll hunt it he makes it clear the beast does not exist. In addition, Ralph wants to build shelters to keep the littluns safe because they are afraid. "Ralph 's right of course. There isn 't a snake-thing. But if there was a snake we 'd hunt it and kill it.
The beast was just a farcical idea that the littleluns embed in their mind. However, it was also the one that initiated the savagery within them. “There isn’t a snake thing. But if there was a snake we’d hunt and kill it.” (36). Before chapter 2, Jack was afraid to kill the pig.
As displayed in Trifles, men support each other so it was an obvious decision to discard any possibility that Mr. Wright is the cause of his own death because that would display weakness. Mrs. Hale makes the statement about men’s hands being dirty in any attempt to defend Mrs. Wright and hope to motivate the sheriff to think of
George is the caretaker who helps Lennie survive. Later in the book, Lennie's actions start to get dangerous, so George is forced to kill Lennie. One reason George makes the correct decision is that he keeps Lennie away from society, so now Lennie cannot hurt or kill anyone else. A second reason George makes the right decision is that George prevents Lennie from suffering in pain because Curley (the boss of the ranch’s son) plans to shoot Lennie in the stomach. George does this by shooting him in the back of the head which is a painless, instant death.
George’s actions towards Lennie are seemingly cruel; therefore, it is understandable why one would be unwilling to condone his actions. However, despite the immutable cruelty of taking someone’s life, George does this to Lennie out of love and care for him. This is demonstrated by George’s understanding of the lack of alternate options. When Steinbeck’s character, Slim, says to George, “S’pose they lock him up an’ strap him down and put him in a cage” (97), to George, Steinbeck is assuring the reader that George is aware of every other possible outcome of the situation. With this knowledge, George ultimately decides that taking Lennie’s life is unequivocally the most merciful way to remedy the egregious situation.
The character who I felt was more justified in his actions by the end of the story was Rainsford. One could argue, he did not act unjustly. The exposition stated Rainsford was a game hunter, hunting big, dangerous game. Zaroff was also a game hunter, but Zaroff became uninterested in hunting jaguars. Zaroff wanted to hunt an animal with intelligence to match his own, so he started hunting his fellow humans.