Oh come ON!
\"the Palm Pistol is designed to give non-aggressors a better chance of surviving a violent attack\"
Who do you think gets fooled by this? It is widely documented that, the more weapons in the equation, the more deaths at the end. If someone gets robbed and has no weapon, he may lose his/her purse, if the person has a gun, it ends more often than not with a dead person, and sometimes with two.
If we follow your logic, a society where every person would have an AK-47 would be perfectly safe. Guess what? it\'s not! And you should know better, as you (most probably) live in the US, where the benefits of having guns all over the place are most visible in the world.
4th April, 2011 @ 12:29 a.m. (California Time)
Surely this must be a late April Fools joke. It has no advantage over a small pistol and I can see a lot of finger shot off incidents in its future
4th April, 2011 @ 6:54 a.m. (California Time)
How is someone carrying a weapon for which they are untrained a good argument for this useless garbage? The article seems to be skeptical of this thing\'s one-shot capability so why repeat the rest of the press release verbatim? Good for senior citizens? Walk around town with this in your hand?
I am not saying that you should not tell us about these things (or all that fancy new military hardware) but I would hope that you take a clearly critical line or none at all
4th April, 2011 @ 7:03 a.m. (California Time)
First, a single shot weapon is an invitation to disaster. Your first (and only) shot better be to a kill zone, because if it\'s not the person you shot at will kill you for sure. As the article says, in a pressure situation users are likely to mis-aim, and if you do you\'re really going to wish you had more bullets. This gun may reduce muzzle drift caused by a trigger pull, but it\'s not going to eliminate nerves, shaky hands, or other reasons for poor aim.
Second, can you just imagine a Sr. Citizen managing to correctly release two safeties in a situation where he/she feels threatened? My mom-in-law struggles with her car keys when she\'s calm, much less a gun when she\'s threatened. If it\'s possible, they\'ll carry it around with the safeties unlocked. And if they carry it around unlocked, with only 9 lb trigger \"pull\", they\'ll be shooting themselves or random bystanders.
I\'m not opposed to people carrying weapons for self defense, when really necessary, but this is just a very bad idea.
4th April, 2011 @ 7:06 a.m. (California Time)
The ergonimics and accuracy of the modern pistol and revolver is well documented.
A single shot weapon in a silly palm grip is nothing less than dangerous.
If its designed for self defense, it\'s designer presumes sigle attacker scenario. Back to that dangerous thing. And, what if your shot misses? Hits the wrong target?
No thinking lisenced gun owner would go near this silly thing.
To draw one\'s weapon in a dire moment of self defense is always a life altering event.
No need to make it more tragic than necessary.
4th April, 2011 @ 7:08 a.m. (California Time)
Everything old is new again, just not as good. :)
4th April, 2011 @ 7:15 a.m. (California Time)
Palm pistol idea more than 100 years old, url is for a repeating one:
Proposed palm pistol may not be an allowed configuration for a weapon in the United States. Collectable antigues such as the one above can probably be sold / traded without any documentation requirement in the USA. Current production guns may have to look something like a gun to be sold / owned in the USA.
4th April, 2011 @ 7:18 a.m. (California Time)
Looks quite a bit like the 1800\'s French \"Le Protector\" Palm Pistol, only it was a 7 shot weapon. Do a Google search on Antique Pistols Palm Pistol\" to see it.
4th April, 2011 @ 7:29 a.m. (California Time)
Already posted by clicking \"reply\" but in case that didn\'t go through... Please consider that those of us looking to learn about the latest NRA approved handguns and the paid ads for radiation suits, future warrior outfits, and other death-dealing junk can read \"soldier of fortune\".
I read Gizmag for a POSITIVE vision of the future, not the same old cowboy killer apps. designed to make the paid killer types at Blackwater drool.
In the future please refrain.
4th April, 2011 @ 7:32 a.m. (California Time)
clever idea, but I would rather just get a conceal/carry permit so if someone attacks I have more than one shot to defend...
4th April, 2011 @ 7:35 a.m. (California Time)
It is never a good idea to have a \"single shot weapon\" with a heavy 10 pound trigger. In a life or death situation speed is life. What if there are multiple attackers as is usually the case. Even if you get off one lucky shot you wind up dying in a hail of bullets from the attackers buddies. A weapon such as the Seecamp .38 is an ultracompact, concealable weapon that is a much more practical and tactical choice.
Here\'s an even better scenario... how about training people to effectively and safely use guns in a self defense scenarios before allowing them to purchase one. Buying a gun before learning how to use it in a combat situation is just as stupid as buying a car before learning how to drive.
4th April, 2011 @ 8:10 a.m. (California Time)
Some of you should do a little homework before looking too stupid. Look at gun related crime statistics and murders rates in the US and where the highest rates occur. The highest rates occur in the cities with the toughest gun control laws. The reason for this is because the criminals know that most people can not protect themselves. The criminals are the only ones with the guns, that makes sense. The founding fathers knew what they were doing. The second amendment is there for a reason. You will never remove all the guns from society, the criminals and or the government will always have them as a way to try and force conformity from its people. The only guns that you can truly remove from American society would be from those that needed them most, and that is from the law abiding citizen. Even though I would not carry this for self defense I appreciate the article.
4th April, 2011 @ 8:46 a.m. (California Time)
The misguided ones erroneously believe that if a victim simply disarm himself and herself, he/she would be safer. Such ignorance empowers criminals, rapists, killers and tyrants.
4th April, 2011 @ 9:19 a.m. (California Time)
This is a very old design that has been tested proven successfully hundreds of years ago. Normal pistol design is very hard on the wrist, both from recoil and weight. The palm design has none of those disadvantages. Those critical of it have said things that are complete false. For example, it is impossible to shoot you own finger off.
The problem is you don\'t understand how it is to be used. If you think of it as a pair of brass knuckles or how people use a roll of quarters in a fight, you get a more accurate impression.
The REAL drawback why is it not already popular now is because it is also the ideal assassin weapon. It is far to concealable, so will probably not be allowed.
And I have to also respond that those who think unarmed populations have less death, is totally wrong. The display of a weapon almost always ends crime without any shots being fired. If being disarmed was safer, then we would disarm police. Its not.
4th April, 2011 @ 9:46 a.m. (California Time)
\"I read Gizmag for a POSITIVE vision of the future, not the same old cowboy killer apps. designed to make the paid killer types at Blackwater drool.\"
Well, here\'s one Obama-voting, non-gun owning Democrat who absolutely loves reading about the electrified jackets, sniper detection systems and the semi-automatic with the zombie-killing chainsaw attachment. http://www.gizmag.com/the-ultimate-in-zombie-defense-the-ar-15-semi-automatic-with-chainsaw-bayonet/10524/
These things are no different content-wise than the mega-yachts, submarines and million-candlepower flashlights Gizmag features that I\'ll never own.
The only problem I have with this Palm Pistol is that if you hadn\'t told me what it was, I\'d have assumed it was some type of asthma inhaler. :-) Sticking the barrel-shaped end in your mouth and hunting for a button to push will have rather unfortunate results though....
4th April, 2011 @ 10:11 a.m. (California Time)
Pfft, I want followup rounds; this thing would just piss off a meth tweak or special K. I\'ll stay with a real pistol. Yeah, I plan to survive. I don\'t care much whether the perpetrator does. There may be a fatality, but as long as it\'s not me or one of mine, I\'m ok with that. Does that offend you? Um, don\'t really care. Get back with me when you or your loved ones are on the line.
4th April, 2011 @ 10:25 a.m. (California Time)
This is nothing new. In 1882 Jacque Turbiaux in France already came up with this palm pistol and made this gun in the US. http://www.genitron.com/unique20.html
The old design is much better (7 shot, small) than this so call \"new design\"
4th April, 2011 @ 10:36 a.m. (California Time)
A lot of rubbish...the next thing that will be said is that it is unfair for little old ladies to arm themselves this way because purse snatchers will not recognize the lethality of the weapon until the triple projectiles are being plucked out of their asses.
4th April, 2011 @ 10:54 a.m. (California Time)
How the notion that more guns equates to more deaths is what needs to be investigated and openly discussed. Facts are facts and the fact is that IN EVERY STATE that has introduced or liberalized their firearm carry laws, their gun related death rates have declined (including accidental shootings).
Just because something is said or printed doesn\'t make it true. LOOK IT UP...
4th April, 2011 @ 11:44 a.m. (California Time)
Nifty Little design , Palm guns have been around for hundreds of years
fox4hhhh and rstid are spot on Right! Facts Are that every City county or state that has enacted a conceal hand gun permit program , The crime Rates have dropped dramatically ,
Gavrilo Bozovic , Why should People be victims ??? Your flawed Logic is , Its just a purse or a wallet and not worth killing some one over , I,m sorry Its just not a wallet or a purse , Its some one dignity there emotional self worth the criminal are stealing
So i,m sorry , If i was being robed and only had $1 in my pcoket i would still shoot the criminal , I Refuse to be a Victim!!!
4th April, 2011 @ 12:34 p.m. (California Time)
rstid -- I don\'t know where you get your facts. Kenesaw, Georgia years ago mandated residents to have a gun in their home. In spite of being next door to Atlanta, the crime rate there is extremely low. The criminal element move on to easier pickings. I remember when Texas enacted it\'s concealed carry laws. The anti-gunners were predicting a blood bath. Guess what, it hasn\'t happened. Criminals will always have access to firearms. When I was a kid, they made zipguns that were effective.
In the end the only thing that matters is the Second Amendment. It recognizes that the people should be capable of forming a militia if it is needed. Having a standing army or even the Army Reserves is not a substitute. The ability to form a militia is based on the individuals ability to own and carry weapons. If you disagree, you are welcome to push for a Constitutional Amendment, but until then, the Constitution is the law of the land and the rest of us will not abide by efforts to bypass it. As far as I\'m concerned, the way the Constitution is worded, Citizens should be only limited by the size of the bazooka that they can carry; and the definition of \"Gun Control\" should be to hit what you are aiming at.
4th April, 2011 @ 12:49 p.m. (California Time)
For the \"2nd Amendment guys, how about telling us what the statistics say about the number of crime reports where a person successfully defended himself by shooting an assailant, vs. number of failures?
Second question: Please explain exactly what the 2nd Amendment meant when it carefully prefaced \"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.\" with: \"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,\"
4th April, 2011 @ 1:13 p.m. (California Time)
As my ol\' friend Bruce is so fond of saying, \"I\'m a terrible shot. But I have 9 more rounds...\" This is not a forum for or against gun control, simply presenting a gizmo. Read it and move on.
4th April, 2011 @ 1:25 p.m. (California Time)
Thanks Gizmag for posting this most interesting palm pistol article. I was not around 100 years ago to even know about such an existing device and even so, I haven\'t seen any of them produced for the current market. Looks like it has two additional safety buttons to arm it. As one seeking personal protection while my wife and I walk from parking lots through rough neighborhoods just to get to city theaters, I would rather clutch one of these instead of just my car keys. I also appreciate this weapon not looking like a standard gun that would otherwise freak-out many of these pacifist anti-gun commenter\'s that might see it, if I should pull it out of my pocket with my change at the snack bar. I am looking forward to its availability. Keep me posted.
4th April, 2011 @ 1:37 p.m. (California Time)
Facebook User: No gun control advocate would want a Constitutional Amendment. Their irrational totally unfounded prejudice would be debated openly and exposed by the facts. The 2nd Amendment allows people to arm themselves for defense against THE GOVERNMENT. How do you think we became ex-British subjects? Unfortunately, anti-gun, pro-authoritarian Supreme Court justices have steadily ignored the Constitution and allowed un-Constitutional laws to weaken the last, best check on gov. Add to that over 100 years of pro-government indoctrination in the public schools and you have a prescription for dictatorship. We had more liberty under King George than we do now.
4th April, 2011 @ 2:25 p.m. (California Time)
I know one thing if not for my pistol I would have been killed when two thugs tried to Rob me. They took off running when I pulled my gun first. How do I know, because the same two committed a robbery the next night killing a victim. I was a Professional trained fighter and I have taken guns away from people 3 times who pulled them on me with the intention of using them. In all 3 cases I was armed but I did not need to use my weapon as they were close enough to me I could defend myself before they could fully draw the weapon. I managed Night Clubs for higher class Hotels or Motels and this came with the territory. I worked in resort areas where people drink too much and all too often try to pull a gun. If not for my training I would have been shot several times or had to shot them. Unlike police I could shoot to injure a policy most police forces do not allow. They only allow you to use deadly force or shoot to kill. If I had the chance I would shoot to stop them if I could. I think a lot of cops would like to have that option. They can only do that with a non lethal weapon.
4th April, 2011 @ 2:42 p.m. (California Time)
This is handy for defense purposes, especially in the Philippines. For protection from dangerous/violent criminals.Guns don\'t kill people. People kill people.
4th April, 2011 @ 2:50 p.m. (California Time)
If I wanted to carry a gun I\'d carry a real one, not this piece of junk.
I\'ve lived and worked for years in Manhattan, home to some of the nation\'s strictest gun laws. They have done no good whatsoever to protect me, my friends or any other law-abiding individuals. People up to no good don\'t respect gun laws any more than they respect other people\'s rights. If they want one gun or a dozen they can always obtain them, law or no law. On the other hand, I most certainly would find it almost impossible to purchase a pistol for self-defense.
Although I\'ve been trained in self-defense, even that can be rendered ineffective against someone who is armed and willing to use their weapon.
The irony is that New York\'s gun laws afford protection, alright. But not for people like me. In practice, they protect the criminals they are designed to foil.
That\'s a bigger joke than even that idiotic palm pistol.
4th April, 2011 @ 4:40 p.m. (California Time)
I have read James Crumley and in one book someone said:\' If they want to kill me
they have to bring their own gun.\'*
4th April, 2011 @ 4:42 p.m. (California Time)
I carry 19 rounds plus one \"in the pipe\" in my 9mm Israeli designed hand gun, love the gun and the flying ashtray bullets, something with ONE shot? oh please, my pepper spray has two shots, and I have used it once, it took two shots to stop the moron, and I hit him dead on in the eyes both shots, this \"weapon\" sounds like a invitation for disaster
4th April, 2011 @ 7:18 p.m. (California Time)
It looks a stupid solution to a serious problem for reasons already stated above: Single shot, overly bulky, and inconvenient, to reiterate a few of the drawbacks; additionally it would probably be embarrassing to be caught in a \"Firearm-free\" zone with such a cumbersome device although it would be difficult to argue it was for any other reason than self-defense or assassination.
Unless I misread one of the accompanying links, this will be limited to a production run of 1,000 units and will be pricey although I didn\'t dig deep enough to find a suggested retail price.
Thank you Gizmag for keeping us abreast of ALMOST ALL of the new tech gagets.
In conclusion I\'d like to offer one overlooked reason for the Second Amendment: \"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.\" - Thomas Jefferson
5th April, 2011 @ 5:45 a.m. (California Time)
This is a new twist on an old design. Setting aside moral debate - more on that later. This version, with only one round, is likely to cause more harm than good - if ever used as intended. Palm pistols with multi-shot capabilities are far less likely to result in initial or resultant injury to the user and were popular around the turn of the last century, when more citizenry went armed as a matter of routine. As for the moral arguments, a wise man once commented that \"An armed society is a polite society\".
5th April, 2011 @ 8:04 p.m. (California Time)
Wow....guns marketed to the weak-minded. What a concept. An almost worthless concept. For the size that THING is, there are several useful firearms that could actually protect you. One of the advantages of having one, is deterrent. Wolves don\'t usually attack the sheepdog, as the sheepdog has teeth. The wolves go for the sheep that don\'t fight back.
No criminal is going to be scared of something that looks like an inhaler. They might at the sight of a small pistol. Something like a Kel-Tec PF-9. SEVEN rounds plus one in the chamber. Probably close to the same size.
5th April, 2011 @ 10:38 p.m. (California Time)
1 shot PalmGun using 1 .38 out of a short barrel (reducing accuracy & muzzle velocity)- 13.4oz unloaded.
Kel-Tec PF-9: 9mm, 7 shot mag, ( 1 in chamber if wanted). Adjustable sites. Controllable. Not much thicker than a pocket knife at .88\" wide (and available with a pocket clip so that it can masquerade as one, or be carried easily like one)- 12.7oz unloaded
Kel-Tec P3AT: .380 auto, 6 shot mag (9rd avail, with grip ext for extra control). .77\" wide.
3.8\" site radius. 8.3oz unloaded. 11.1oz WITH loaded magazine.
Taurus, Ruger, NAA, and probably a few others, are making copies of the kel-tec- usually nicer, fancier, copies, but copies nevertheless.
I can\'t imagine anyone actually trained in urban/self-defense pistols ever recommending an ultra-short-barreled single-shot PalmGun. It looks like a novelty gun that is probably going to get people unfamiliar with guns & real-life scenarios hurt.
Can\'t believe ATF classified this as a \"pistol\". I\'ve seen far more conventional pieces fall into the \"AOW\" category.
14th April, 2011 @ 9:02 a.m. (California Time)
According to the World Health Organization the murder rate in post soviet Russia is twice the U.S.\'s every year since the fall of communism, before that it was 4 times (but also a much larger group of countries).
According to the W.H.O. The U.K., with a land mass and population the same as my home state, has twice the robbery and assault rate of the whole of the U.S.
When gun crime is broken down per capita (1,000 people) the United States doesn\'t even make the top ten on the World Health Organization list.
So yes, \"And you should know better, as you (most probably) live in the US, where the benefits of having guns all over the place are most visible in the world. \"
Of course the palm pistol is low tech and old, fire-arms are the highest tech low tech device, it is a tube with a needle, the fuel is a rapid flame, and it is just a box. It\'s what we do to make all those things work that is high tech.
16th April, 2011 @ 9:34 a.m. (California Time)
I like it. I don\'t imagine it will be a replacement for my regular sidearm (nor is it intended to be) but in that last minute struggle when you\'re down I\'m sure it would be a welcome thing to have to jam into the bad-guy\'s neck...
This, of course would no doubt be a class III weapon like a suppressor, sawed off shotgun, or submachine gun. Legal to own but only after extensive federal red tape (to my knowledge no legally registered class III weapon has been used in a crime).
I actually also believe an armed society is more polite not less. Cities in the US with the most restrictive firearms restrictions are also, coincidentally, the ones with the highest murder rates; while places like Switzerland have mandatory ownership of a fully automatic weapon in every household, yet have extremely low crime rates....
18th May, 2011 @ 2:46 p.m. (California Time)
Setting aside the issue of whether self-defense with firearms is any different than any other form of self-defense with lethal potential:
Palm guns have been around since the invention of firearms. There were many made similar to this one, and were used for exactly the same reason, self-defense in a life-threatening situation.
Yes, in a robbery, you\'re best served by handing over the goods and letting the robber go, even if you\'re armed. However, not every threat involves robbery, and if the attacker intends to kill or maim you, well, all the progressive social attitude in the world won\'t save you.
Whether this little thing is useful or not is certainly debatable. The reflex-response on the list is...well...predictable.
I believe every individual has the right to defend themselves and their family, property and innocent by-standers. How you choose to do that, with or without the great equalizer of a gun, is your business.
12th July, 2011 @ 5:09 p.m. (California Time)
Google for ring pistol. Most of those were 4mm pinfire, holding six shots in a tiny cylinder similar to that of a revolver. They had no barrel, the bullets just fired out the front of the cylinder.
14th July, 2011 @ 2:29 p.m. (California Time)
Well, after reading all these posts, it seems to me that if we were all as passionate about sustainable energy as we are about \"pro/gun, no/gun\", we\'d have that problem solved.
Time to get busy, America and buy our country back from China.
17th July, 2011 @ 4:45 p.m. (California Time)
Imagine this scenario...... You wake up in the morning and can't move, you try in vain to move your legs,midsection,hips,any part of your body from the chest down and nothing happens.....no movement at all. You find that you can move your arms and shoulders somewhat, but your fingers no longer bend or squeeze shut to close your hands, you have very little grasp, barely enough to pull the sheet up to cover your self with. But after a few attempts you get lucky and the sheet loosens its grip and you cover yourself. That scenario is one thousands get to live thru every morning, I know, because I've done it for the last 13 years of life. Every one who's hands work fine have no use for this gun, and their comments show they are blind to those of us who need it. Try living with a spinal cord injury, and not only will you find out what your made of, you'll gain a whole new perspective on the value of protecting life....yours,and those you love.
22nd May, 2012 @ 7:51 a.m. (California Time)
This design may not be perfect, but when someone's hands dont work, it's the next best thing. Unfortunately, I think the shooter would have to be right up on their attacker, like a stun gun, but this will do more damage. So I think it moves away from keeping you safe to making you a vigilante. That's ok with me too. LOL except I dont like the part of getting close to attacker,
30th January, 2014 @ 5:54 a.m. (California Time)