1. [Laughs] Yes, they probably would (as I said in my original post); however, there's this wonderful thing called punishment...
You would state the rule in the warpost, and then people would either willfully ignore it or completely fail to understand how far 60-80 feet actually is.
But seriously, if a host made it clear to everyone at the beginning of a war that there was a new rule every bit as important as all the other rules, and that it was important enough that he would have to punish anyone who broke it, it could conceivably work. I know it's not fun to make people sit out a round, or not use their favorite air gun for a round, or whatever, but it's not about winning popularity contests.
2. Surely it wouldn't be too hard to have a 60' distance marked before the war, and have everyone observe it?
I didn't think of that, and I agree.
This still doesn't do anything to cover the possibility that someone runs in front of the shooter shortly before the person shoots.
Sorry for not being clear. I should have said it like this: The way I see it, air guns aren't practical inside 50 or 60' range or so, because their RoF is usually too slow to compete with the high RoF springers that are only used at 50-60' range. But Beaver brought up the point that it's much easier to hit someone at close range with a fast-shooting air gun than it is with a low-power springer. That's definitely a disadvantage to my theory, I admit.
You could be right about the point of air guns, I never really understood it.
Pardon the rude joke, but not if you want to hit anyone.
Perhaps a more reasonable way to restrict high-powered blasters without altogether banning them would be a minimum firing angle of 45 degrees.
But seriously, you might want to try shooting while holding the gun at a 45° angle or higher. It's not exactly practical, even if you're trying to not have great accuracy. Furthermore, making sure people hold their air guns at that angle for every shot would be at least as difficult as enforcing my idea.
I should have emphasized the extreme theoretical-ness of this idea more. Again, I'm not saying I'm convinced it will work, I'm saying I'm not convinced it would be impossible. We really won't know until someone tries it. In my opinion, banning guns that are "too powerful" negates the purpose for innovation of farther-shooting guns. To me, innovation is the point of the hobby.