Condoning the banning of any gun could leave you with nothing more than a stick or a rock. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." Our fore fathers recognized that a stick was no match against the then government's flintlocks, hence the words "shall not be infringed" which to me means that the people should have sufficient weapons to protect themselves from a runaway government.Well a ban on .50 I wouldn't really dislike...I mean for civilian use it's basically useless and to damn dangerous as a gun.
When I got my 50 BMG I was warned by the maker that the gun would shoot 6 miles. While I have the ability and location to check that out I haven't done it yet. To get maximum range from any gun it has to pointed at about a 45 degree angle from level ground. In my opinion there is no way any bullet would even travel half its maximum distance after a ricochet simply because so much energy would be absorbed when striking something causing the bullet to change direction. Additionally the bullet would most likely be damaged becoming ballistically unstable. Also 6,500 meters is 4.03 miles. Bottom line I believe the Texas story is possible but it had to be a direct shot and not a ricochet.