Interesting thread, (perhaps a little less of the abusive comments - cant we all just get along?) but.... has anyone considered the spread when applied to the initial question???
Risking 3 pips to gain 3 pips (1:1 ratio) is fine as long as,
1) Your system has an expected win rate over the long term of greater than 50% (if not you'll lose cash overall). This is only hypothetical however as,
2) You need to factor in the spread (which no-one has mentioned yet). This means your win rate in the above scenario actually needs to be significantly higher than 50%
3) You also need a way to deal with unexpected gapping and slippage (such as using fixed stops) as previously mentioned in the thread, to stop your account blowing up after an unexpected event (eg news, natural disaster, etc). Usually your spread would be higher for measures like a fixed stop, hence further increasing the win rate you'll need to make money overall.
Trading for such a small amount of pips would be classed as scalping. It can be done, it has been done, & it is being done right now...but its a tough game that takes a special type of trader in order to be successful over the long term.
Your main barrier to success with this scenario in real world is the spread. If the spread is 1 pip, actually you need to gain 4 pips each trade for every 3 pips risked in order to break even. This makes your risk/reward ratio significantly worse than 1:1. Compare this with risking 50 pips for a 50 pip gain - you need to gain 51 pips each trade for every 50 pips risked to break even. Again this leaves a risk/reward ratio of less than 1:1, but much closer to it than the scenario with 3 pips. This is why scalping is hard, there's a real uphill battle to overcome the spread, and thats before you take into account slippage and gapping.