No, not really--if I worked for the TSA I'd profile Jesus for extra security attention--but it sounded sufficiently jingoistic to be right for a post on small ball, don't you think? The kids at ProPaintball have posted a video of Bob huffing and puffing and blowing a plastic tray down using a 68 cal Victory and a modified 50 cal Victory for comparison purposes.
Best I could tell Bob was advancing 3 basic ideas; small ball shoots and breaks fine at short to medium-ish range (75 feet), small ball can shoot through brush, tree branches and other woodsy obstacles more effectively than 68 cal and small ball delivers less impact at similar velocities. Given those factors 50 cal deserves at least consideration as an alternative to 68 cal in some situations, like games with younger players or new players where the difference between a good time and never again is the potential pain involved.
The first idea is fine as far as it goes but it doesn't go far enough--and elsewhere in the video Bob admits the range is reduced compared to 68 cal and the paint is more susceptible to factors like wind--so kudos for being straight on the observed effects. I just didn't find it particularly persuasive, nor does it motivate me to reconsider the virtues of small ball.
I'm not buying the second notion at all. The video example was not shooting through brush. It was shooting through gaps. Back in the day the VM 68 (and later the first gen clamshell Timmy) punched holes through dense Florida palmettos. You didn't need to see your target. Just start railing and if you hit something, or somebody, you were rewarded with a satisfying yelp unless, of course, you were simply stripping the bark off trees.
But I am buying into the whole reduced impact argument though there is a caveat; breakability. The paint has to break as consistently as a 68 cal paintball, grade of paint for grade of paint. While I find Bob's concern for the children who are our future both uplifting and personally gratifying I also find it more than a little ironic given--how to say this, Bob's past association with guns of dubious legality.
On a completely separate subject one of the first things I did when I heard about 50 cal was to explore the possibility of producing a generic retrofit kit (or two) to convert 68 cal guns to 50 cal. It became apparent in short order that while not hard to do every kit would have to be gun or manufacturer specific and that if 50 cal looked good the manufacturers would jump on it. One other thing concerned me: the possibility of Dye modifying their eyepipe patent. They do have one, don't they?