They were enemy combatatants literally invading the Tower.
That does not matter. An innocent person with a gun is a valid target. An unarmed guilty person is NOT. That's why we HAVE courts and due process, to assign judicious and appropriate punishment to guilty people.
The Allies were invading Europe, including several countries which had treaties with Germany and German soldiers were tried, convicted and punished for killing those invaders after they were disarmed.
If you really want to get into right and wrong based on who is on which side, the Seanchan are under the authority of the lawful heir of Artur Hawkwing, against whom the White Tower committed such egregious crimes that they deposed their own leader.
You talk about enslavement, but Egwene is angry at her friends for negotiating a deal by which Tower initiates are allowed to quit and return to their homes and people and she demands that they submit, under an explicit threat of punishment, to a form of Compulsion that limits their freedom of speech and action. Egwene specifically said she "expects" any women with the ability to serve in an organization subject to her dictatorial authority. The difference between her and the Seanchan is semantic or merely of degree. There is at least a widespread precedent for the state to have the right to conscript its citizens for military service. There is nothing in the real world by which an extranational organization has the right to demand decades of service due to an accident of birth. It is every bit as much a violation of the same principle as killing channelers just because they are channelers.
In any event, all else aside, Egwene no more right to kill unarmed women, even if they are "invading" the Tower. What do you believe about Turak? Was he right to try killing Rand, Mat, Perrin, Ingtar & Hurin? They did the same thing, after all.
As far as the real world application of your nonsensical summation, you have to demonstrate an incident where that was provably the mindset. Because they generally ARE shot for "doing" something, it's just not something that seems all that dangerous to keyboard activists, but is very different when you are confronting a member of hostile community.
No, because it's not okay to shoot the KKK! What is wrong with you? And even if it WAS okay, they would have to demonstrate that they could reasonably have made the mistake. A "fake" gun does look like a real gun. That is the whole point of it, to simulate the experience of carrying a firearm. To point it at a police officer is the height of colossal stupidity, especially for a member of a population that claims to live in terror of police violence.
As far as shooting the police in justifiable circumstances goes, it is not the right who wants to outlaw cop-killer bullets.
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Inde muagdhe Aes Sedai misain ye!
Deus Vult!
*MySmiley*
