Hoplite, if you look carefully at the picture, you will notice that the machine gun in question has a tailstock. If memory serves me (and you right), a 0.50 cal doesn't for obvious reasons. I would therefore conclude that the weapon in question is not a 0.50 cal "sniper," but closer to something you used, except on a heavier tripod. The footage of Radovan shooting the weapon shows that he did not possess the skills of a fine marksman with that machine gun. His fire seemed indiscriminate. I don't know if non-combatants were in those buildings, or if the buldings were abandoned, so I can't pass a judgemnt other than that any such undisciplined firing is highly irresponsable and -- coming from a high political figure -- reprehensable.
The gun like that one was used to fire on Bosnian Muslim positions and, yes, people who wore civilian clothes died. Many of them carried weapons, and were not really civilians. Others were innocent people, even kids, heartlessly caught in someone's cross -- on both sides, Hoplite, let's not forget that.
anyone who has been in the military knows that anything firing on automatic (see the stacked bullets) is not a precision weapon.I take it from your response that we have cleared this up - I referenced the M2 as an example of a machine gun employed in the sniper role.
The weapon in question is a Zastava M84 (thanks to Mark502Inf) and my comments as to it's effectiveness, when configured properly, as a long range weapon stand.
Lastly, the Bosnian Serb sniping campaign against civilians, carried out in conjunction with and concurrently with a military campaign against Sarajevo's defenders is too well documented to bring into question, Kosta. Please do not do so.