Impeachment? Would that be appropriate and sufficient for a domestic terrorist? (not too sure on the "domestic" part...)

There are many examples of rules being overlooked when the circumstances clearly warrant it or when the one breaking the rules is above them. The reason they are being enforced in this case is very much in line with this administration. Oh, yeah, the rules - like not having classified information on an unclassified computer - obviously doesn't apply to some...

I understand that this is how the military works. But the officers in charge also have discretion. I would be more willing to discipline him if he didn't shoot the bastard.

I agree. Much of America does not understand the military. Including, it would seem, Allen West.

Are you in the state guard?

Zero tolerance = zero common sense.
Especially when it comes to a gun free zone for easy opportunity targets.

Alan West is premature, to be charitable.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/2015/8/2/...

Should be a wrist slapping, then a handshake and policy change. Then the US people can see what happens to assailants when they attack armed peoples!

Wasn't there an incident something list this in Canada, relatively recently, that had a very different outcome?
Hmmmm

What you say is true, however if he had chosen to follow the rule many more would have died. As part of the USN there are times when shit happens and common sense supersedes the code of military conduct - eg. kicking the shit out of two punks while on shore leave in Puerto Rico to drag a shipmate back to the ship. We should have been put in the brig and PR tried to press charges, but my Commander stood by us and all we got was a week of mess duty. There were many incidents routinely handled at the moment without legal escalation or reprimand when I served.

Yes, the UCMJ is an entirely different set of rules but common sense and heroism transcends both.

If this man gets slammed with anything more than a token punishment its shameful and I intend to raise hell.

It has nothing to do with President Obama. It could happen under a Republican administration. It is how the military works, and it is not a surprise to anyone. The Commander may well receive a commendation and a reprimand on the same day for this. The rules are clear. He broke one. What remains to be seen is the actual consequence. I predict that he will receive the minimum.

Whether all military personnel ought to be armed is not an easy problem. Our military traditions run deep, and I grant that some of the most basic run contrary to other basic assumptions of our society. Officers are considered to be a class above enlisted personnel ("officer and a gentleman"). Officers are armed so that they can shoot soldiers who disobey. Allowing enlisteds to carry their own sidearms would run contrary to all of that.

I grant that this attack was not an isolated example. Therefore, change may be necessary. Indiana has made the change.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/07/1...
Texas also (among others see WSJ here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/some-stat...
http://gov.texas.gov/news/press-relea...

For myself, I note that Indiana, Louisiana, and Texas have state guards, and as I read these orders, they do not apply to us.

This president and the cabal of like minded minions that make up this administration are nothing short of despicable.

There is no rational thought in the Dark Center.
Obama is a disgrace. Impeachment is not enough punishment.

Allen West confirms. Just read his article