Depends on what you mean by "machine gun"[1]. By the most common military definition, no. The recoil force would probably throw it to the ground, and even if it did not, the accuracy would be so laughable that it'd be more efficient to just load cyberdog with the same weight in high explosive fragmentation.
A SMG or autopistol . . maybe. Something like the Skorpion, firing .32 ACP, might be low recoil enough for aimed fire.
[1] There's a few categories here, and popular/legal categories differ from military ones. Legal "machine guns" include firearm capable of automatic fire, but this includes: 1) Autopistols and submachine guns (SMGs) fire pistol calibers, from .22LR (American 180) to .45 ACP (Thompson); 2) Assault Rifles, firing intermediate power cartridges like .223 and 7.62x39mm; 3) Battle Rifles are firing full power rifle cartridges - .308 Winchester and 7.62x54mm- from a box or drum magazine and can fire in full auto[a]; 4) General Purpose Machine Guns (GPMGs) capable of sustained belt-fed rapid fire with full-power rifle cartridges; 5) Here we're entering the realm of support weapons[b], firing Heavy Machine Gun rounds like .50 BMG, 12.7mm, 14mm, and other weapons like the Mark 19 automatic grenade launcher or the M134 Minigun (which fires .308 but a whole lot of them).
[1.a] Lots and LOTS of Internet Tough Guys will insist that the M14 or FAL on full auto is totally controllable by Real Men - i.e., it's only the sissification of our cucked armed forces that have brought on the curse of the Intermediate Cartridge. I'll leave judgement to the reader. Incidentally, the Venn Diagram of "Battle Rifle" and the older 1900s-1930s term "Light Machine Gun" is, functionally, a single large circle - it's just the advancement in materials and machining that make them any different. So why didn't LMGs take off back when men were Manly Men and could handle the POWER? Heh heh heh heh yeah. Physics wins again.
[1.b] Needless to say, a whole other category of internet moron insists that .50 BMG on autofire is controllable by a "man enough" infantryman operating singly. I'm sorry that this opinion exists, like, as a human being, but make your own judgement, as always.
A SMG or autopistol . . maybe. Something like the Skorpion, firing .32 ACP, might be low recoil enough for aimed fire.
[1] There's a few categories here, and popular/legal categories differ from military ones. Legal "machine guns" include firearm capable of automatic fire, but this includes: 1) Autopistols and submachine guns (SMGs) fire pistol calibers, from .22LR (American 180) to .45 ACP (Thompson); 2) Assault Rifles, firing intermediate power cartridges like .223 and 7.62x39mm; 3) Battle Rifles are firing full power rifle cartridges - .308 Winchester and 7.62x54mm- from a box or drum magazine and can fire in full auto[a]; 4) General Purpose Machine Guns (GPMGs) capable of sustained belt-fed rapid fire with full-power rifle cartridges; 5) Here we're entering the realm of support weapons[b], firing Heavy Machine Gun rounds like .50 BMG, 12.7mm, 14mm, and other weapons like the Mark 19 automatic grenade launcher or the M134 Minigun (which fires .308 but a whole lot of them).
[1.a] Lots and LOTS of Internet Tough Guys will insist that the M14 or FAL on full auto is totally controllable by Real Men - i.e., it's only the sissification of our cucked armed forces that have brought on the curse of the Intermediate Cartridge. I'll leave judgement to the reader. Incidentally, the Venn Diagram of "Battle Rifle" and the older 1900s-1930s term "Light Machine Gun" is, functionally, a single large circle - it's just the advancement in materials and machining that make them any different. So why didn't LMGs take off back when men were Manly Men and could handle the POWER? Heh heh heh heh yeah. Physics wins again.
[1.b] Needless to say, a whole other category of internet moron insists that .50 BMG on autofire is controllable by a "man enough" infantryman operating singly. I'm sorry that this opinion exists, like, as a human being, but make your own judgement, as always.