Did Dareon deserve to die?

[Fat Trell]

I really can't believe people are arguing morality in favor of a person willing to let an old man, a 16(?) year old, a young women, and an infant die. All of whom had never been rude or cruel towards him.

There are hundreds of threads debating whether Arya had any moral or legal right to kill Dareon. This isn't one of them.

[The Dragon King]

Arya is not in a position to enforce anything.

Ummm, she did enforce it.

[Disputatious]

Arya is not in a position to enforce anything.

This contravenes what the text of AGOT clearly states, both in the second chapter where the deserter is executed by Ned and also in the one later on where Bran and Robb are temporarily taken captive by two other "crows who flew down off the Wall". Anyone may execute deserters from the Night's Watch. That is what makes such deserters particularly dangerous, as is noted in both chapters: they know the risk they are running. They will, as noted in those places, commit further crimes, including murder, to avoid being taken.

In short, reread the text before polluting the forum with error.

The interesting point in the narrative is that Arya is not shown trying to explain that to the Kindly Man. Perhaps she did have misgivings about trying to enforce Westerosi law in Essos.

[Graven]

Didn't he waste the money Jon gave them to pay for a boat, supplies, medicine for Aemon and whatnot, with prostitutes and overall excess?

Totally deserved to go.

[The Mother of The Others]

depends on whether vigilante justice is always wrong or if it's only wrong when the "justice" is unfairly prejudiced and the mob rushes to judgment.

If the Faceless really can succeed in removing themselves from vigilante status, if they can be the impartial weeders of humanity's garden like they claim to be, then..... maybe they'd be an improvement over our system's failings? If those who do wrong meet up with a Faceless judge at a moment when their actions suggest they don't deserve to exist..... maybe their death could be considered fair play by a society that harbors the Faceless. You takes your chances and you try to put your best foot forward at all times so any hidden judges watching you can see that you do deserve to exist. ...... It'd sure put the 'fear of god' back into people who in our society have learned to get away with whatever they can when no one's looking. Well, in Braavos, No One is looking, and that's what keeps them honest!

But isn't Arya targetting people like him because they offend her on some personal level? Which does sound like the style of vigilante justice that experience has taught us to discourage. This makes it look as if the FM are just fooling themselves when they say they're above personal vendettas. Then again, she did it without the official blessing of the FM, as a padawan learner who may just not have reached full impartiality yet, assuming that's something the Kindly can teach her. So Dareon's death isn't something to condemn the faceless organization for just yet.

[RoamingRonin]

Did Daeron deserve to die? Yes. He was a deserter of the Night's Watch. He broke his vows. How is this even a thing? Honestly. Where is that post on over analyzing and over reaching?

[JesterX]

Didn't he waste the money Jon gave them to pay for a boat, supplies, medicine for Aemon and whatnot, with prostitutes and overall excess?

Totally deserved to go.

Wait a second . . . that's wrong. They were already out of money when they were in Braavos. Dareon was supposed to earn NEW money with his singing and bring it back to them. He didn't steal or waste anything.

[A Bastard Snow]

Honestly not only did he desert but he wasted money on prostitutes and generally enjoying himself then said "GLHF Sam and abandoned Sam and Aemon"

Also he was given a super freaking nice job as it is....I mean really he was in no danger all he had to do was go around singing about the watch yet he goes meh forget that.You guys act like Jon sent him north of the wall naked to fight the others single handedly

He literally could have still been with prostitues and such and sung about the watch and sent some money/supplies back to the watch.All he had to do was sit around singing all day make money/donations and send them to the wall and he could have sat in Braavos safe and happy

[Lord Reaver]

This contravenes what the text of AGOT clearly states, both in the second chapter where the deserter is executed by Ned and also in the one later on where Bran and Robb are temporarily taken captive by two other "crows who flew down off the Wall". Anyone may execute deserters from the Night's Watch. That is what makes such deserters particularly dangerous, as is noted in both chapters: they know the risk they are running. They will, as noted in those places, commit further crimes, including murder, to avoid being taken.

In short, reread the text before polluting the forum with error.

I assume it's this line: "The deserter knows his life is forfeit if he is taken, so he will not flinch from any crime, no matter how vile or cruel."

You're interpreting as "anyone may execute deserters from the Night's Watch" ?

Suffice to say, that doesn't mean what you think it means. What it means is the penalty for desertion is death, and once you have a death sentence, you really don't have to care about doing any other crimes.

Note that it says "taken". Why would anyone "take" them, if they can just be killed? Indeed, why is Ned bothered with killing Gared at all, if the people who captured him could simply have done so themselves ?

Why do we have this line: "But the man they found bound hand and foot to the holdfast wall awaiting the king's justice was old and scrawny, not much taller than Robb."

Why await the king's justice, if any man can mete out said justice as well as Ned ? The only answer to this is they can't, it's Ned's job, and you're dead wrong.

Nice touch ranting about "polluting the forum", though, I needed a good laugh.

PS: If in the future you feel the need to direct someone's attention to the text, the preferred way is to actually quote it. It's a bit hard when one has to guess at what you're talking about, as I did here.

[SeanF]

I can't help thinking of Gandalf's comment, here

"Deserves to die. I daresay he does. Many live that deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it back to them? Then do not be so eager to deal out death in judgement."

Arya is becoming too eager to deal out death in judgement.

[Fat Trell]

Wait a second . . . that's wrong. They were already out of money when they were in Braavos. Dareon was supposed to earn NEW money with his singing and bring it back to them. He didn't steal or waste anything.

Right, but wrong.

Sam and Dareon used most of their money to buy board and a doctor for Maester Aemon.

They ran out of money because Aemon was too ill to continue.

Dareon was supposed to go and earn money for them to buy firewood, food, clean water, and their voyage..

Instead of doing this, he spent(wasted) the money he earned on whores, new clothes, and wine for himself.

He effectively left 4 people to die in a strange land. One of whom was an infant. None of whom had ever wronged him.

Dareon was a shit person.

[OldGriff]

The laws are the laws, we don't get to use our modern day morals to debate it...because it's not modern day.

And here's the crux of the majority of the threads I read here. Applying modern day ethics to ASOIAF scenarios is an exercise in futility.

Yes, he deserved to die and I hope he burns in hell!!!

-Samuel L Jackson

[OldGriff]

Personally, I think Sam's reaction is most telling. By all accounts, Sam is a coward that shuns confrontation and would rather read books than practice in the yard with sword and bow. This gentle soul physically attacked this scumbag due to his desertion of his sworn brothers. He said the words, he deserved to die. That's it.

[laguna80]

And here's the crux of the majority of the threads I read here. Applying modern day ethics to ASOIAF scenarios is an exercise in futility.

Yes, he deserved to die and I hope he burns in hell!!!

-Samuel L Jackson

It's amazing how many people on this forum don't seem to understand this concept.

[JesterX]

Right, but wrong.

Sam and Dareon used most of their money to buy board and a doctor for Maester Aemon.

They ran out of money because Aemon was too ill to continue.

Dareon was supposed to go and earn money for them to buy firewood, food, clean water, and their voyage..

Instead of doing this, he spent(wasted) the money he earned on whores, new clothes, and wine for himself.

He effectively left 4 people to die in a strange land. One of whom was an infant. None of whom had ever wronged him.

Dareon was a shit person.

Sorry, but there's a difference between spending someone else's money on yourself, and spending YOUR OWN money on yourself. Dareon was under no obligation to use his own money that he earned on Sam, Aemon, and Gilly. And he didn't leave them to die, either. They were two able-bodied people who had the same opportunity to earn money for themselves as Dareon did.

[Pod The Rod]

I like to think Arya whacked him because he talked trash about Jon, not for the desertion.

[The Mother of The Others]

Same money-making opportunity? Daereon can sing to make money AND he can manwhore himself, whereas Sam could only manwhore, and who's going to purchase that?

[BitsOfBrains]

By law he deserved to die BUT I feel really bad for the guy.

He was on the wall because a girl falsely accused him of rape.

I mean he was what? 14-16 when he got sent to the wall?

He was a total player with every reason to believe he would have a long easy life full of lords feast leftovers and smitten girls.

Instead he gets sent to the frozen ass end of the world through no fault of his own.

I remember what it was like to be 16.

Yeah, I feel bad for dude.

[JesterX]

Same money-making opportunity? Daereon can sing to make money AND he can manwhore himself, whereas Sam could only manwhore, and who's going to purchase that?

Just because someone doesn't have the ability to earn as much money as you doesn't mean that you're responsible for taking care of them.

[Fat Trell]

Sorry, but there's a difference between spending someone else's money on yourself, and spending YOUR OWN money on yourself. Dareon was under no obligation to use his own money that he earned on Sam, Aemon, and Gilly. And he didn't leave them to die, either. They were two able-bodied people who had the same opportunity to earn money for themselves as Dareon did

See but he was. He was a member of the Night's Watch. Aemon and Sam were his superior officers.

Anything he earned was property of the Night's Watch.

And leaving two people alone in a foreign land when neither one of them speaks the language and they have a sickly old man and an infant to care for is tantamount to leaving them to die.

Your original argument was that he would have came to his senses. While this is obviously wrong, it implies you yourself think that desertion is wrong.

So you think that his desertion itself was wrong but his abandonment of his superior officers and a few month old child was ok?

Hard to follow your logic bud.