Here's another chapter in "All AK-47 All the Time" book...

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20110621/ARTICLES/110629913


This article describes some idiot shooting a deer and alligator (out of season), and the subsequent charges he faces. Fine.

But had the clod shot the animals with a walnut and blue steel hunting rifle -- even an autoloader like the hoary Remington 742 --would the article's headline include the weapon type and name? (For the benefit of those new to the forum, a Remington 742 is chambered for rounds significantly more powerful than an AK-47.)

I guess the lurid appeal of the old Remington is a little lacking.

_______

BTW, I am SteveM from another time and place. SteveW is the same bright and shining face, now operating a (somewhat) de-bugged old laptop. And I really do have over l,000 postings!

It's obviously not that dangerous a weapon.

If you got nuked and you're back, then you're a zombie and they'll re-nuke you.

If your old account is still active, then you're a sockpuppet now, and they'll nuke one or both of you.

I'd send an email to Skinner or EarlG, and/or post in the ATA forum about this if I was you.

I'm guessing this is a case of a forgotten password for an account with a now-lost email address.

That makes one of three things true:

1. It was a very small alligator.

2. He's a very good shot with a rifle known for it's inaccuracy.

3. He's a moron. Because shooting a large alligator, non-fatally, with a relatively low-powered bullet like that is an invitation to just piss it off.

They aren't 500-meter rifles. They were never intended to be. But at short ranges they are more than adequate. We really need to put that myth into the ground.

I don't define 3-6 minute-of-angle as acceptable accuracy when you're shooting at something that can and will bite back. You have to be far too close to make an accurate kill shot.

Lucky he didn't catch felonies over this, he better kiss the ground those animals walked on.

idjit.