I saw this ad for a new palm pistol. I have heard that palm pistols are a big no-no with today's regulations, something about barrel length, etc.
What do you think?
http://www.palmpistol.com/
What do you think?
http://www.palmpistol.com/
Palm pistol
- Thread starter panther22
- Start date
- Status
Treo
member
Is that a Palm 650 pistol or a Palm 800 ? Or is it a Palm Centro?
gidaeon
Member
I think its great for companies to work at "new" products. Interesting, but it says a "projected cost of $300." Uh, I think a lot of practically minded folks will think "I could get a p3at, LCP, ect.., for the same or less." Wow, might come with a picatinny rail. Not my thing at all, but good for American innovation I guess. To bad such things couldn't be a far cheaper alternative to reliably pocket pistols.
Carl Levitian
member
it looks like a solution to a problem I don't understand.
jaysouth
Member
No rail or night sights. Who does trigger jobs on them?
Does Brownells stock parts yet?
Wonder when Ted Yost at Heirloom Precision will start doing full house mods on them?
Won't be long before Lorcin make a knock-off.
Does Brownells stock parts yet?
Wonder when Ted Yost at Heirloom Precision will start doing full house mods on them?
Won't be long before Lorcin make a knock-off.
Jim Watson
Member
A single shot palm gun. Whee.
Couldn't they have at least modernized the Chicago Protector 7 shot?
Couldn't they have at least modernized the Chicago Protector 7 shot?
DrLaw
Member
Yep, agree. The Chicago palm pistol would have been a better gun to try to reproduce. The thing here seems to be a one-shot wonder, with no aiming capability.
I'm guessing the attraction would be carrying a gun where you could not carry a gun, and not have something that would scream out "Gun" if seen. Looks more like it could be an inhaler, but I would not want to inhale its contents.
Also agree that the thing is an answer to that for which there was no question asked.
Can't blame them for trying to make a buck, though.
The Doc is out now.
I'm guessing the attraction would be carrying a gun where you could not carry a gun, and not have something that would scream out "Gun" if seen. Looks more like it could be an inhaler, but I would not want to inhale its contents.
Also agree that the thing is an answer to that for which there was no question asked.
Can't blame them for trying to make a buck, though.
The Doc is out now.
Loosedhorse
member
Looks like an updated version of the old Chicago Firearms Company palm pistol
Also looks like an NFA AOW, so get your paperwork ready!
Also looks like an NFA AOW, so get your paperwork ready!
JImbothefiveth
Member
It looks like it could be a good idea, but maybe they should add some sights. (I guess you could always add a laser on the rail.) They should also make it a repeater, maybe like the old "lemon squeezer" pistol.
twoclones
Member
Kind of reminds me of the *zip guns* made from car antennae. Only a commerciallly manufactured rather than in Dad's garage.
kingpin008
Member
It's interesting that so many seem to be suprised at the lack of sights - aren't "gut guns" (which this thing clearly is) pretty much contact-range weapons to begin with? I mean, what good are sights going to do, when you're holding the thing that way to begin with? At that range, it'd be "point fist-squeeze-BANG".
That said, I totally agree on the price point. If this is supposed to be something for the older set, or folks who don't have a lot of income to spread around, $300 is a pretty big whack for a single-shot weapon that's virtually incompatible with most modern firearm training techniques. While I'll quickly join the others in saluting the inventor's ingenuity, I have to think that those considering picking up one of these little things is better off with a cheap used revolver.
That said, I totally agree on the price point. If this is supposed to be something for the older set, or folks who don't have a lot of income to spread around, $300 is a pretty big whack for a single-shot weapon that's virtually incompatible with most modern firearm training techniques. While I'll quickly join the others in saluting the inventor's ingenuity, I have to think that those considering picking up one of these little things is better off with a cheap used revolver.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I'd like to see their letter from ATF saying it's a standard Title 1 firearm.
In the past ATF has held that things that don't look like firearms are considered AOW's, requiring the tax stamp.
Pen guns for example.
The claim ATF has approved it. I'd like to see that, it would be surprising.
In the past ATF has held that things that don't look like firearms are considered AOW's, requiring the tax stamp.
Pen guns for example.
The claim ATF has approved it. I'd like to see that, it would be surprising.
45Broomhandle
Member
loosedhorse has pictured the original "palm pistol" - in most folks' minds - the Chicago. Those old guys were a work of art, AND they had a revolving cylinder which held more than just a single round.
There were others quite similar, bearing different brand names, but the Chicago led the way.
Best regards ~ ~ ~ 45Broomhandle
There were others quite similar, bearing different brand names, but the Chicago led the way.
Best regards ~ ~ ~ 45Broomhandle
yhtomit
Member
Well, in the class of "tiny pistol that isn't yet available," I think I'd rather have one of these: http://bobergengineering.com/boberg_xr9shorty.htm
And I'd also like to see the ATF letter ...
timothy
And I'd also like to see the ATF letter ...
timothy
seeker_two
Member
I sure hope an asthmatic customer doesn't mistake it for an inhaler... 
Tacbandit
Member
Quote:
"I sure hope an asthmatic customer doesn't mistake it for an inhaler..."
Seeker two,....just what I was thinking...I believe I'd put that money towards a real gun...
"I sure hope an asthmatic customer doesn't mistake it for an inhaler..."
Seeker two,....just what I was thinking...I believe I'd put that money towards a real gun...
snorko
Member
It Has An Optional Accessory Rail
Legionnaire
Contributing Member
Rats; I thought maybe you were talking about a pistol concealed in one of these!
Last edited:
AZAndy
Member
I'm suspicious of a company that misspells "discreet."
I'm also a little confused by the BATFE letter. They say it's a pistol; does that mean it can't also be an AOW?
For example, if a pistol has no rifling in its barrel, it's still a pistol, and also an AOW requiring registration.
The BATFE letter does not address the AOW question the lawyer asks, it just provides the definition of "firearm" and "pistol."
It also seems that the FTB is creating a "chicken and the egg" scenario by wanting a working version. If they send it in and it's classified an AOW, would they be arrested for not having registered it?
For example, if a pistol has no rifling in its barrel, it's still a pistol, and also an AOW requiring registration.
The BATFE letter does not address the AOW question the lawyer asks, it just provides the definition of "firearm" and "pistol."
It also seems that the FTB is creating a "chicken and the egg" scenario by wanting a working version. If they send it in and it's classified an AOW, would they be arrested for not having registered it?
- Status
