TexasCHLforum.com

Single-shot, thumb-operated Palm Pistol set for 2011 release



The use of firearms for self-defense is a divisive issue, with weapons, especially concealable ones, being easily misappropriated for wrong-doing. While we're reluctant to suggest adding more guns to the equation, the newly developed single-shot Palm Pistol does have some worthwhile qualities as a defensive weapon for non-aggressors.

MORE HERE: http://www.gizmag.com/single-shot-palm-pistol/18278/

There was one of these announced a couple of years ago. It may be the same company. I will try to dig up the post. Here it is:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=20661&p=234656&hili ... lm#p234656" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's a similar model manufactured in 1882.

I wonder what caused the 3 year delay?

I don't necessarily think it's a good option for carry, but it still looks very interesting.

I wonder how accurate it is beyond 2 feet.

It kind of reminds me of the "hand" gun that was used in the movie Inglorious Basterds. If you haven't seen it, it's a decent movie.

McKnife wrote:I wonder what caused the 3 year delay?

I don't necessarily think it's a good option for carry, but it still looks very interesting.

I wonder how accurate it is beyond 2 feet.

Most likely financing. Tooling for making this type of stuff is very expensive. I would imagine that getting permits for manufacturing firearms, lawyers fees, proof testing, etc is also very costly. One lawsuit for a gun blowing up in some one's hand could easily bankrupt this company.

McKnife wrote:
The use of firearms for self-defense is a divisive issue, with weapons, especially concealable ones, being easily misappropriated for wrong-doing. While we're reluctant to suggest adding more guns to the equation, the newly developed single-shot Palm Pistol does have some worthwhile qualities as a defensive weapon for non-aggressors.

MORE HERE: http://www.gizmag.com/single-shot-palm-pistol/18278/

Yes, because dying at the hands of a thug is morally superior to defending your life. Gizmag, your writers are idiots.

gizmag wrote:Minus the optional picatinny rail, which is suited for the LaserLyte subcompact V2 laser site, extra round carrier or other accessories, the .38 special caliber weapon is extremely light with an unloaded weight of only 13.4 ounces.

I have a .357 snubby that also will fit in my pocket, with an unloaded weight of 13.3 ounces, which will hold 5 rounds of .357 rather than 1 round of .38 Special (not +P) ammo, and which can be reloaded 5 rounds at a time instead of one at a time.

It is difficult to find any pricing information about the Palm Pistol, but I did find this article from 2008 about it that says the manufacturers intend to market it at $300 per copy. (LINKEY). At that price, if I were being consulted, I would recommend a used S&W Airweight J-frame revolver, or its equivalent from some other manufacturer, for only a little more.

Also, if the gun were to ever have a kaboom, it will completely remove your hand. No if's and's or but's.

The Annoyed Man wrote:At that price, if I were being consulted, I would recommend a used S&W Airweight J-frame revolver, or its equivalent from some other manufacturer, for only a little more.

As much as I like and support "new and improved technology" I still think that the S&W Airweight is a better choice.

WildBill wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:At that price, if I were being consulted, I would recommend a used S&W Airweight J-frame revolver, or its equivalent from some other manufacturer, for only a little more.

As much as I like and support "new and improved technology" I still think that the S&W Airweight is a better choice.

mostly because I dont like the idea of having a 1 shot gun, often times I worry about my 7 rounds not being enough

zero4o3 wrote: mostly because I dont like the idea of having a 1 shot gun, often times I worry about my 7 rounds not being enough

And this one is much prettier.

I think what y'all are missing is the original intent of the Palm Pistol. It was originally intended (and still is, I think) for people with dexterity issues and weak hands/wrists who might not be able to manipulate a traditional firearm. The manufacturer even tried to get it listed as a medical device so that Medicare/Medicaid could subsidize the cost for seniors who couldn't afford it.

I don't necessarily like it either, but if it was one shot with a Palm Pistol, versus swinging my cane at the bad guy, I think I'll take the Palm Pistol.

The Tri-Plex ammo they talk about may not be the best choice, either. Seems to be too much of a compromise. Here's a writeup: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011 ... cartridge/

More on the Palm Pistol here: http://www.palmpistol.com/

I'm wondering since it doesn't "look like" a typical pistol, if it will win an AOW award from BATFE like the old "cane gun/umbrella gun" etc.

This sounds interesting though
http://www.palmpistol.com/triplex.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

triple-projectile .38 special standard load cartridge containing three stacked conical projectiles which at close range deliver a 158 grain payload that reliably separates and tumbles upon entering tissue

UpTheIrons wrote:I think what y'all are missing is the original intent of the Palm Pistol. It was originally intended (and still is, I think) for people with dexterity issues and weak hands/wrists who might not be able to manipulate a traditional firearm. The manufacturer even tried to get it listed as a medical device so that Medicare/Medicaid could subsidize the cost for seniors who couldn't afford it.

I am not missing that point. I am not a medical expert, but I think that there are other, less expensive and better alternatives that are already available for seniors or other shooters with weak hands or wrists. If this product fills a niche market and is a success, I have no problem. I would think that any S/A automatic or revolver would be able to do the job as well as this palm pistol.

Trying to get it listed as a medical device so that Medicare/Medicaid would subsidize the cost is a novel idea, but I don't think it will fly. If the inventor can prove that it also lowers cholesterol then maybe he will have a chance.

WildBill wrote:

UpTheIrons wrote:I think what y'all are missing is the original intent of the Palm Pistol. It was originally intended (and still is, I think) for people with dexterity issues and weak hands/wrists who might not be able to manipulate a traditional firearm. The manufacturer even tried to get it listed as a medical device so that Medicare/Medicaid could subsidize the cost for seniors who couldn't afford it.

I am not missing that point. I am not a medical expert, but I think that there are other and better alternatives that are already available for seniors or other shooters with weak hands or wrists. If this product fills a niche market and is a success, I have no problem. I would think that any S/A automatic or revolver would be able to do the job as well as this palm pistol. Trying to get it listed as a medical device so that Medicare/Medicaid would subsidize the cost is a novel idea, but I don't think it will fly.

If one has weak hands and wrists, particularly if one is a somewhat handicapped senior, then pain in the hand is going to be an issue too. I've shot 158 grain standard .38 loads from my wife's 642, and they aren't that fun. The thought of shooing a 158 grain load from my palm through a barrel held between two of my fingers makes me wince.... ....and my hands don't hurt normally. You can do things to make the trigger pull on a snubby at least feel lighter, if not actually lighter. And if you have one with an exposed hammer or partially shrouded hammer, at least it can be thumb-cocked and fired single action if the trigger can't be made light enough. The manufacturer of the Palm Pistol is talking about 9-10 lbs of pressure on the trigger button to fire their device. That's not that light either.

Hardly anybody has never seen a revolver fired, if not in person, than on the silver screen. They are utterly simple, and dead reliable. And they are ergonomically designed for the task. The more I look at that Palm Pistol, the more I have second thoughts about whether I would really want to ever fire one. I understand the intended niche and market. I get it. I just don't think that it fits the bill better than a lightweight .38 revolver does, and for the most part, fits the bill worse than said revolver.

I respect their innovation and motives. I just don't think its a very good solution. Even a double barreled derringer would be a better idea.

RPB wrote:I'm wondering since it doesn't "look like" a typical pistol, if it will win an AOW award from BATFE like the old "cane gun/umbrella gun" etc.

I would have thought it would be an AOW too, but the manufacturer has an ATF letter classifying it as a GCA Title I pistol. Of course, that doesn't mean the ATF won't change their mind at some point in the future.