abortionist tiller should have been shot... from a prolife perspective

I tend to look at profiles of people before I debate, as a way to prepare for the style of argument I might expect. I notice Pro occupation is legal and given the salary range a low position at best. Being in the legal profession I am surprised with Pro's disregard for the legal system, even if she feels it has failed her cause. The topics I most often debate on, pits me against creationist. Their biggest problem is PR. Pro-life has a similar problem. The world changed with Roe v Wade. Gunning down doctors who provide abortions does not lend creditability to ones position. Neither does advocating for the death of doctors. Without creditability how can one be convincing? Without being convincing how can one win the people? Without winning the people how can one change laws? Pro notes "war theory". War is about 2 things. Picking your battles and picking your tactics. The USA is a nation of laws. If Pro-lifers wish to win the war (overturn Roe V Wade) then they must be in for the long haul. This war is for public opinion. Murder is going to help the other side win the public. Killing abortion doctors is the wrong tactic and the wrong battle. Pro started off with the claim "he did them illegally. .. " I ask Pro to provide evidence of any court cases that show it was actually determined that he was doing these things illegally. If such evidence exists what was the sentence? Was it death? The abortion debate is full of emotions. Emotions can motivate it can also cloud heads. I must ask, the death of Dr. Tiller how many babies were potentially saved? I need you to put an actual number to this, even if only an estimate. This seems to be your reasoning to justify murder. This is a bad reason and I will help you understand why. Now take that number and tell me, if that number of people were dying of a disease and the cure was in one fetus but the only way to save that number was if the fetus was destroyed. Would you also argue that one fetus should die in that case? Pro you are trying to swap lives, one death to save more, while believing that all live are valuable. I know my example is different, but it is still swapping lives. If you object to this argument tell me why. I plan to find one you can’t object to if need be. Anyone who looks at my profile can see I am pro-choice. I believe abortions should be legal. I believe less abortions can be achieved without passing restrictive laws but rather by addressing the factors that lead people to abortion. My views are data driven. I support comprehensive sexual education over abstinence only because it is far superior at reducing teen pregnancy. Less pregnant teens means less teen abortions. Sadly the pro-life movement has been about treating the symptom. I ask Pro to join me and let’s address the cause. Let us look at the data and find the reasons women get abortions and let’s fix that. The pro-life way doesn’t actually stop abortions they drive them underground and put more lives in danger. My way might take longer but my way means abortions clinic closing for lack of customers. I ask Pro to join me and we can fight the cause of abortions because taking a life is never a good tactic. Even more so if you label yourself as being for life. I am in the maintenance fields. When something breaks sure you can replace that part but if there are reasons that part is breaking and you don’t address the true cause well then the problem remains. Join me let’s fix the true causes. From a prolife perspective Dr. Tiller should not have been shot because it hurts the creditability of the prolife cause.