Re: bayonettes are too a useful device

You wrote: 

>If you fire a .50 cal in the situation you described you will probably
>kill about 5/10 civilians who are just siting on the roof tops 
watching >all the fun, and harming no one! The bullets come down 
somewhere, and if >you aren't aiming at someone then they may well hit 
some poor child >playing in his/her crib. If you live anywhere near one 
of our Yankee >urban ghettos you may well have already heard the story 
on the evening >news where pistol bullets have done this.  GOOD troop 
commanders try to >train their troops to stop short of this idiocy.  
It's stupid to over >react.

Define overreact in the context of a couple hundred nutcases, probably 
on drugs, throwing rocks, molotovs, and covering the fire of a couple 
dozen guys with AKs.  My perspective is that it's better to live with 
having waxed a couple of idiots who are too stupid to live anyway 
(defined as anyone who thinks a riot with live ammo is a spectator 
sport) than to cease living.  

Also note that there is a difference between putting down rioting 
American citizens (or other people you are charged to protect) and 
dealing with rioting Third Worlders who are aiding your enemies.  

To make this relevant, how many of the troops normally used in 
Dirtside/Star Grunt games care about that?  Certaintly not Foreign 
Legionairres (OK, rename them Colonial.  Safe diff) nor ESU personell 
(come on, they consider T-59s crowd control in their capital city!) nor 
a lot of other cultures.  

John M. Atkinson