The bolt. The bolt goes in the receiver. Operating rod handle. Operating rod guide.
For some reason, my brain parsed “machine gun” as “gum machine,” and I was very confused by the comments.
Judging by the grin at the end and the pride she displayed, i would say good thing, regardless of any other consideration.
Now I just have to wait 7 years and go meet this girl.
Somebody’s gotta say it:
That’s hot.
She would blow away some of the guys in my old platoon. Even though it is an AR-15 the are broken down the same way. The only main difference is in the trigger assembly which doesn’t get broken down. I was impressed.
It’s not a machine gun.
And any if it was (I’m using the ATF definition here) it would be the same procedure.
I don’t know much about Stoners but one of the beautiful things about a Kalshnakov (AK-47) is that it was designed for illiterate conscripts to be able to field strip the thing and put it back together. I imagine the Stoner is only slightly more complicated.
Details. My position stands. I am sufficiently unsophisticated about guns to assume that “machine gun” as used in this thread title really means “big scary gun” and while there were hints before my post that it wasn’t really a machine gun as knowledgable folk use the term, it doesn’t change anything.
From my perspective, the relevant details are that she has some specialized knowledge about how to dis/reassemble this particular gun. Really, except for the eek factor, this isn’t all that differet from being able to solve a Rubik’s cube quickly, or put together a Lego playset. The eek factor is not insignificant, but it makes sense that she is being taught what makes guns dangerous (people!).
:smack:
Sadly, if she went to e.g. Africa she could use it for real in a conflict.
A machine gun is, by definition, automatic. The rifle that the girl is assembling is an AR-15 which is the semi-automatic version of the M-16, which is fully automatic. The gun looks scary because you’ve only seen it in Hollywood movies, with bullets being sprayed in every direction, by characters more than likely displaying horrible shooting technique and safety, portrayed by actors who are probably anti-gun (and yet have no problem making their money portraying lead-hosers.)
But you can’t judge a book by its cover. The Winchester hunting rifle in your grandpa’s closet is more powerful than that girl’s rifle.
Well, technically a machine-gun is a different kettle of fish again to an Assault Rifle.
Traditionally, a Machine-Gun is not designed to be fired unsupported from the shoulder; they’re mounted on a bipod/tripod/aircraft/tank/boat.
Thus, an AK-47 isn’t really a machine gun, but a Lewis Gun is.
As you say, it’s semantics. ;)
This is all very true.
If she has a bona fide interest in guns, then it’s cool she can do it. If her parents are pushing her into it because of their own agendas, then it’s not cool. (To that extent, it’s like any other activity that kids do.)
Also, I don’t think it’s such a good idea that her video was put out on the internet. I don’t think an 11-year old is competent to make a decision on this issue and I don’t see any need for her parents to upload the video on her behalf. (Of course, that assumes that the video was made recently. If dad shot the video 10 years ago, and daughter uploaded it for kicks yesterday, it’s a different story.)
It’s a skill, like any other skill.
Politically, I’m as tipped to the left as you can be.
I happen to really, REALLY like things that go boom. I know firearms very well, too. I’ve handled them, I’ve taken them apart, I’ve fired them, I write extensively about them – hell, when you watch many of your favorite television cop-shop shows and shit blows up n’ there’s lots of talk of arms dealers and Albanian connections, I’ve quite possibly touched that script somewhere along the way…
So yeah – I say go Mackenzie. She probably has learned the skill with her dad, enjoys it, and has picked up gun safety skills. There’s no harm in that. Hopefully she hasn’t picked up a “kill all 'em peoples not us” philosophy…
She has much smaller fingers than most men. Helps with the smaller parts like in the bolt*.
ETA: Bolt carrier assembly you pedantic asshats.
Well it’s certainly different from those cup stacking videos.
It does help to know your audience, doesn’t it?
Given her assurance and big smile at the end, I’d say she has spent many happy hours on the range with dad, learning gun safety and the joys of perforating paper targets. There are little things in the video that tell me she is used to that rifle, and has used it for more than just dexterity demos.
She can do it faster than me and an Army buddy of mine. We consider ourselves pretty accomplished shooters, too.
Unfortunately, she does screw up (from a safety standpoint) at the very end. Notice how after reassembling the rifle she clearly puts her finger inside the trigger guard – it is difficult to tell if she touches the trigger. Granted, she has short fingers and it may be hard for her to keep her index finger out of there.
My thoughts, too. It seems harmless enough, but do we really need Soldier of Fortune circling her 18th birthday on the calendar? That aside, she looks very eager to please whoever’s shooting the video, and for the most part it just seems like a puzzle.
It’s nice, but it’s not difficult. Modern military arms and their civilian derivatives, modern meaning post-WWII, have ease of dis- and reassembley as part of their design criteria.
If she could do the same thing with some civilian arms, like the old Savage Model 99 for example, that were notable dirty, dirty dirty sons of bitches to dis- and reassemble, I’d be more impressed.