Finally, a gun just right for the baby!

Introducing the world's smallest gun that fires deadly 300mph bullets - but is just TWO inches long
By ANDY DOLAN - More by this author » Last updated at 16:39pm on 5th March 2008

Meet the pistol that fits in your pocket - and packs a hell of a punch.


The SwissMiniGun is the size of a key fob but fires tiny 270mph bullets powerful enough to kill at close range.
Officially the world's smallest working revolver, the gun is being marketed as a collector's item and measures just 2.16 inches long (5.5cm). It can fire real 4.53 bullets up to a range of 367ft (112m). The stainless steel gun costs £3,000 although the manufacturers also produce extravagant, made-to-order versions made out of 18-carat gold with customised diamond studs which sell for up to £30,000.


It cannot be imported into the UK, and buyers in Switzerland and Europe must produce an import permit from police to obtain one.
The gun is banned from being imported into the US - because it's barrel is less than three inches, meaning it is deemed too small to qualify for sporting purposes.
Jonathan Spencer, consultant forensic scientist and firearms expert, said that although the gun, which fires bullets at a speed of 399 feet a second, was tiny, it could still prove fatal and in the eyes of the law was as dangerous as a machine gun.
He said: "The general threshold for perforating the skin is about 330 feet a second.
"Apart from bone, skin offers the greatest resistance to penetration. If it can pass through the skin it is potentially lethal, even if the bullets are small.
"If you shoved something 3mm across into someone's chest you could kill them. It's the same with these bullets, they could penetrate the heart.
"It is capable of killing someone. Under section 5 of the Firearms Act it would be a prohibited weapon. It would be on the same scale as a machine gun." The gun shoots 2.34 mm calibre rim fire ammunition especially developed for it as the smallest rim fire ammunition in the world.


The gun is the first product of the SwissMiniGun company, a gunsmiths based at La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland.
Owner Paul Erard said that since the product's launch three years ago, the firm had sold around 300 of the guns, mainly to collectors in the Middle and Far East.
He said: "We are producing in very small quantities - perhaps 25 gold guns and 100 steel guns a year, and there is a six month waiting list to get one.
"We will make whatever the customer wishes for. The most expensive version we have sold cost £30,000 and was covered in diamonds and came with a gold chain."
Other bespoke finishes available include ebony grips, hand engraved grips, gold grips with diamonds or collared precious stones.
Mr Erard said that although the double action revolver is similar in appearance to a Colt Python full-size weapon, it was actually based on a Swiss-made revolver.
In September 2006 the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives(ATF) in New York issued a warning about the gun after being alerted by a police officer who spotted it on a website.
Special Agent William McMahon said the gun was so small it could pass for a key fob, and warned it made the perfect stealth weapon for serious criminals.
But Mr Erard denied the gun was deadly and said it was only a tenth as powerful as some air guns.
"Since September 11 there has been a lot of paranoia in America", he said.
"It is ridiculous. Why would criminals want my gun when you can go out and buy a Kalashnikov there already?" A Guinness World Records spokesman confirmed the gun held the record as the word's smallest working revolver.

How do you even pull the trigger on something that small? Look at the trigger hole............ smaller than that person's finger. No way you'd be able to actually hold it like real gun and shoot. Just too tiny.

This is great. I like how the holster has a key ring with it! But seriously I would fear a .22 over this thing and I can probably do more damage to someone with my paintball guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH

Owner Paul Erard said that since the product's launch three years ago, the firm had sold around 300 of the guns, mainly to collectors in the Middle and Far East.
"Since September 11 there has been a lot of paranoia in America", he said.
"It is ridiculous. Why would criminals want my gun when you can go out and buy a Kalashnikov there already?" A Guinness World Records spokesman confirmed the gun held the record as the word's smallest working revolver.

---

The asshole is selling guns mainly to "collectors in the Middle and Far East ", and then accuses us of 9/11 paranoia!

If this gun is so non-lethal, then he should make a video of himself being shot with one to prove it.

We don't need those guns in New York City, that's for sure.

lol at that gun. It was just made for the record books, that's all

Thats a pretty funny gun. You couldn't hit anything except the end of your finger.lol
I use to have a 45 colt dual barrell derringer with a 2" barrell. Couldn't even hit a stop sign at 20 feet.

;)its cute, :wtf:but I have doubts it could do any serious harm, unless shot point blank right into a eye, throat and maybe the back of the head

a simple metal writing pen, would seem more effective to me

Quote:

---

We don't need those guns in New York City, that's for sure.

---

I have to disagree. If theres anything the state of New York (and especially NYC) needs is a lift on gun bans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rebgirl420

I have to disagree. If theres anything the state of New York (and especially NYC) needs is a lift on gun bans.

---

I'm curious as to why you feel this way. We're doing doing much better, in terms of crime rates, than most of the states where guns are less regulated. New York City is very safe these days. Basically, more guns equals more crime.

They bombed a recruitment center early this morning, but I doubt that citizens with guns would have been able to do much to prevent that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

I'm curious as to why you feel this way. We're doing doing much better, in terms of crime rates, than most of the states where guns are less regulated. New York City is very safe these days. Basically, more guns equals more crime.

---

2nd Ammendment gurantees us the right to keep and bear firearms, and there is no evidence that restricting guns will lower the crime rate. A thief or murderer will still rob and kill, just by using other means.
Should we ban cars, because morons maim and kill while driving drunk? ...while evading police? ...while putting on make-up, or eating, or on the cell phone?
As with guns, it's not the car that kills folks, it's the irresponsible driver. And there's not even a Z28 Ammendment. (the right to keep and drive two-ton weapons)

The DC Gun Ban:

"Today, gun control makes people demonstrably less safe-- as any honest examination of criminal statistics reveals. In his book "More Guns, Less Crime," scholar John Lott demolishes the myth that gun control reduces crime. On the contrary, Lott shows that cities with strict gun control--like Washington DC--experience higher rates of murder and violent crime. It is no coincidence that violent crime flourishes in the nation's capital, where the individual's right to defend himself has been most severely curtailed.

Understand that residents of DC can be convicted of a felony and put in prison simply for having a gun in their home, even if they live in a very dangerous neighborhood. The DC gun ban is no joke, and the legal challenges to the ban are not simply academic exercises. People's lives and safety are at stake.

Gun control historically serves as a gateway to tyranny. Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

They bombed a recruitment center early this morning, but I doubt that citizens with guns would have been able to do much to prevent that.

---

Likely a member of code pink, but how does that figure into this discussion? I guess an armed citizen could have shot the sob as he rode off, tho.

Why don't you tell my why we have under 1000 murders a year in New York State, with over 19 million people?

Arizona Crime Rates 1960 - 2006
2006 population of Arizona:
6,166,318
Number of murders: 465

New York Crime Rates 1960 - 2006
2006 population of New York State:
19,306,183
Number of murders: 921

New York State, with over thee times the population of Arizona, and stricter gun control, has significantly less murders, per capita, than Arizona.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

I'm curious as to why you feel this way. We're doing doing much better, in terms of crime rates, than most of the states where guns are less regulated. New York City is very safe these days. Basically, more guns equals more crime.

They bombed a recruitment center early this morning, but I doubt that citizens with guns would have been able to do much to prevent that.

---

I feel that way because I feel our second admendment rights are being stripped away. new York City isn't any safer. The fact that there is a gun ban makes evryone unsafer because the criminals (who still have guns btw) are able to pick out victims that are sure NOT to have guns. I don't know about you but i would rather take my chances robbing someone in NYC than say somehwere in Texas where theres a good chance I may get my head blown off my shoulders.

The gun laws only punish honest. hard working people from owning guns. NOT the tough criminials (the reason for the gun bans in the first damn place).

And if that bombing of the rescruiting center happened where people could have guns he/she may not have made it very far.

This site that I linked shows the stats for NYC and other places that have ennacted gun bans (like D.C., Australia, etc.) and the information shows that the violent crime rates are climbing right on back up.

Crime Statistics Page

NRA-ILA :: Articles

I also found a list of true and false gun control myths at Gun Control: Myths and Realities

1. Thousands of children die annually in gun accidents.

False. Gun accidents involving children are actually at record lows, although you wouldn't know it from listening to the mainstream media. In 1997, the last year for which data are available, only 142 children under 15 years of age died in gun accidents, and the total number of gun-related deaths for this age group was 642. More children die each year in accidents involving bikes, space heaters or drownings. The often repeated claim that 12 children per day die from gun violence includes "children" up to 20 years of age, the great majority of whom are young adult males who die in gang-related violence.

2. Gun shows are responsible for a large number of firearms falling into the hands of criminals.

False. Contrary to President Clinton's claims, there is no "gun show loophole." All commercial arms dealers at gun shows must run background checks, and the only people exempt from them are the small number of non-commercial sellers. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, at most 2 percent of guns used by criminals are purchased at gun shows, and most of those were purchased legally by people who passed background checks.

3. The tragedy at Columbine High School a year ago illustrates the deficiencies of current gun control laws.

False. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold violated close to 20 firearms laws in amassing their cache of weapons (not to mention the law against murder), so it seems rather dubious to argue that additional laws might have prevented this tragedy. The two shotguns and rifle used by Harris and Klebold were purchased by a girlfriend who would have passed a background check, and the TEC-9 handgun used by them was already illegal.

4. States that allow registered citizens to carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates than those that don't.

True. The 31 states that have "shall issue" laws allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons have, on average, a 24 percent lower violent crime rate, a 19 percent lower murder rate and a 39 percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons. In fact, the nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all right-to-carry states. Remarkably, guns are used for self-defense more than 2 million times a year, three to five times the estimated number of violent crimes committed with guns.

5. Waiting periods lower crime rates.

False. Numerous studies have been conducted on the effects of waiting periods, both before and after the federal Brady bill was passed in 1993. Those studies consistently show that there is no correlation between waiting periods and murder or robbery rates. Florida State University professor Gary Kleck analyzed data from every U.S. city with a population over 100,000 and found that waiting periods had no statistically significant effect. Even University of Maryland anti-gun researcher David McDowell found that "waiting periods have no influence on either gun homicides or gun suicides."

6. Lower murder rates in foreign countries prove that gun control works.

False. This is one of the favorite arguments of gun control proponents, and yet the facts show that there is simply no correlation between gun control laws and murder or suicide rates across a wide spectrum of nations and cultures. In Israel and Switzerland, for example, a license to possess guns is available on demand to every law-abiding adult, and guns are easily obtainable in both nations. Both countries also allow widespread carrying of concealed firearms, and yet, admits Dr. Arthur Kellerman, one of the foremost medical advocates of gun control, Switzerland and Israel "have rates of homicide that are low despite rates of home firearm ownership that are at least as high as those in the United States." A comparison of crime rates within Europe reveals no correlation between access to guns and crime.

The basic premise of the gun control movement, that easy access to guns causes higher crime, is contradicted by the facts, by history and by reason. Let's hope more people are catching on.




Gun control is a bunch of hoopla that the government uses so that it can strip your rights and you will have no way of protecting yourself. The founding fathers knew that the right to bear arms was VERY important. And that's true even to today.

I dont' need a gun. My friends don't own guns.

We have effective police protection. Crime in New York is very low, and has been for years. Why? Because we don't have guns.

The guns that come here illegally are usually from gun-friendly states like Arizona, where the murder rate is higher than New York. To add insult to injury, the gun-nuts tell us that we have to arm ourselves to protect our lives and property against gun-toting criminals that got their weapons in the first place from the communities where they reside!

These are the facts. New York is safe, and we're not going to run around packing heat like it's a frontier city, the Wild West, or a scene of urban decay and dangar - because it's not. If it gets like that, I'll reconsider my decision. For now, it's more dangerous to have a gun in NYC than not.

i have always believed that guns don't kill people, people kill people. and trying to impose violations of second amendment rights is quite simply gives the criminal element an edge over the entire population. they already know the illegal methods of purchasing a gun which is far less regulated. if the gun restrictions were lifted or altered in a certain way it could quite possibly "level the playing field" amongst criminals and citizens alike.....:stoned:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

The guns that come here illegally are usually from gun-friendly states like Arizona, where the murder rate is higher than New York. To add insult to injury, the gun-nuts tell us that we have to arm ourselves to protect our lives and property against gun-toting criminals that got their weapons in the first place from the communities where they reside!

---

Gun nuts? We get these rights from the United States Constitution, not from 'gun-nuts'. However, on the other hand, I'm not at all willing to let 'anti gun-nuts' attempt to tell me I can no longer own the tools I use to protect my family.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

These are the facts. New York is safe...

---

:S2: :S2: :S2:

Too funny. Some are not as fortunate as you to have such a fine police state..er..I mean such a fine police force. No matter how much 'anti gun-nuts' whine, I will keep my guns and my 2nd ammendment rights, thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Trichome

Gun nuts? We get these rights from the United States Constitution, not from 'gun-nuts'. However, on the other hand, I'm not at all willing to let 'anti gun-nuts' attempt to tell me I can no longer own the tools I use to protect my family.
:S2: :S2: :S2:

Too funny. Some are not as fortunate as you to have such a fine police state..er..I mean such a fine police force. No matter how much 'anti gun-nuts' whine, I will keep my guns and my 2nd ammendment rights, thank you.

---

I don't care if the people in other places want guns, what I object to is the ignorant assumption that New York needs them as well.

Not for nothing, but I grew up in a pretty tough environment, and we learned how to settle things without guns.


Punks from the suburbs and the sticks who couldn't hold their own against a bar rag make ME laugh. :)

Most gun-loving guys have serious issues with their masculinity. :thumbsup:

I guess if I lived in a remote, or dangerous area, I'd have a rifle too. But that's not New York, and we don't need them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

Most gun-guys have serious issues with their masculinity. :thumbsup:

---

Proof?
Your logic is flawed. I treat my guns like I treat my grow. Not for public viewing. I'm actually more concerned with my family being safe, than I am about what others may think about my guns, which nobody but my wife and I have ever seen.

If you chose to not utilize your rights, that's fine by me. But are you one of the "let's not tap terrorists phone calls" guys? Tell ya what...you disregard the rights you wish to disregard. I'll do what I feel is right.

(So by your thinking, anti-gun guys have issues with their lack of masculinity, lol? :jointsmile:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Trichome

(So by your thinking, anti-gun guys have issues with their lack of masculinity, lol? :jointsmile:)

---

Gun guys have got plenty of it (masculinity). Maybe a little too much, if you catch my drift. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

Most gun-loving guys have serious issues with their masculinity. :thumbsup:

I guess if I lived in a remote, or dangerous area, I'd have a rifle too. But that's not New York, and we don't need them.

---

Gotta love it when you contradict your own statements....New York is not a dangerous area?? You gotta be smoking something other than weed. That little toy pistol is cute, but I like something I can get my hand around.

I for one, don't hunt, but I do enjoy collecting sporting arms and shooting them either in the woods, or at the range. It bothers me to see folks that can't handle the responsibility of ownership, that want to try and take others rights away from them. If you don't own any weapons, and have never fired one, then you really have no reason to even enter into the conversation unless its just to stir the pot.

I have attached a couple of pics... the lone target was done with a 30-06 at 200 yards, while the revolver was fired at its target at 50 yards. Proficiency and safety are the key words here. All weapons should be stored in a secure place, seperate from the amunition, they should be kept clean and in good working order. They should be taken out and fired at least once a quarter to maintain proficiency. If you own a weapon and never fire it, then all you have is an expensive club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve

Gotta love it when you contradict your own statements....New York is not a dangerous area??
If you don't own any weapons, and have never fired one, then you really have no reason to even enter into the conversation unless its just to stir the pot.

---

I'm sure that target shooting is a lot of fun, there are gun clubs in New York City, and 232 Ranges in NYS, but we don't need to carry pistols around in the streets of NYC.

You got a problem wit dat? :cool:

Mississippi Crime Rates 1960 - 2006
Mississippi murder rate in 2006:
Population 2,910,540
223 Murders

We've got almost 10 times the amount of people in NYS, and less than 4X the amount of murders. Get the point yet?

I don't carry a weapon around town here either. Now if we could just convince the criminals and gangs that they don't need to carry them....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve

I don't carry a weapon around town here either. Now if we could just convince the criminals and gangs that they don't need to carry them....

---

Good luck. They do have their "rights", in your neck of the woods. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve

I have attached a couple of pics... the lone target was done with a 30-06 at 200 yards, while the revolver was fired at its target at 50 yards. . . . .

---

hey man, nice shot. :smokin: i have hunted my whole life but like the man said, it is good to have guns out here in the sticks (I'm in BF Oklahoma) but if NYC wants to control them within their city then thats all groovy to me. Even Dodge City, back in the Wild West days, had a gun ban in town, i believe.

oh yeah, and what is the deal with this gun in the pic? i assumed it was a joke, this is not real is it?? :wtf: :stoned:

. . . okay . . i see the trigger now. yikes.

^^^ note to Mississippi_Steve, I didn't mean to reply to you with all that stuff in my above post . . just want to tell you nice shot. :thumbsup: the rest was just for everyone else to ignore. :stoned: :jointsmile:

That's so stupid to put the metal "ring" around the trigger; thus making it impossible to shoot. :mad:

that gun is too cute for its barrell
it dont look like it can do shit

gotta be a toy from the cracker jacks

guns are not a bad thing
use your sense

they are still used to rid the world
of the TRUE " bad men and women"

its not the gun
its the person behind the gun

GUN saftey should b drilled into ones head

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silkyblue

that gun is too cute for its barrell
it dont look like it can do shit

gotta be a toy from the cracker jacks

guns are not a bad thing
use your sense

they are still used to rid the world
of the TRUE " bad men and women"

its not the gun
its the person behind the gun

GUN saftey should b drilled into ones head

---

LOL, I've never seen a gun debate put forth as a poem. :thumbsup:

Looks to me like the trigger guard flips down, allowing access to the trigger. :jointsmile:

thank u life is 'one big poem'

I especially love the title to this thread

Honey ! "The babys playing with the gun again!"

lol

Here's a pic of my kid and his heater.
[attachment=o180978]

Just a gimmic, they couldnt possibly consider that a self defence gun. I really wanna get a derringer too, cant beat that interchangeable 45 and 410 for self defence.

derringers are sweet for a ladies gun

we have a 12 gauge winchester

I can shoot , hunny loves to teach me about the gun

if some nuts are thinking we have money way back here they are gonna get blowed away,

Im instructed to give the perps the weed, yeah right a dinky quarter

bargaining wif criminals/theives isnt good

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trip06

Just a gimmic, they couldnt possibly consider that a self defence gun. I really wanna get a derringer too, cant beat that interchangeable 45 and 410 for self defence.

---

Before you waste your hard earned $$$$ on a dinky toy pistol, with man sized bullets, you might want to go test fire one first. You may find out(the hard way) that its just not your cuppa tea.... broken hand and/or fingers is just not a lot of fun.

Think about the first law of physics...for every action, there is an equal but oposite reaction....then equate that to firing a .410 with no appreciable barrel and grip thats 1/4 the size of a regular revolver. If I don't get your attention, the deringer most certainly will the first time you pull that trigger.

Put this gun on your keychain and you are likely to shoot yourself in the balls getting it out of your pocket.

About this...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Trichome

2nd Ammendment gurantees us the right to keep and bear firearms, and there is no evidence that restricting guns will lower the crime rate. A thief or murderer will still rob and kill, just by using other means.
Should we ban cars, because morons maim and kill while driving drunk? ...while evading police? ...while putting on make-up, or eating, or on the cell phone?
As with guns, it's not the car that kills folks, it's the irresponsible driver. And there's not even a Z28 Ammendment. (the right to keep and drive two-ton weapons)

---

...cars are a good analogy, I think. We don't take away the driving privilege without cause, and I don't think we should ban guns either. But we do register cars so that owners can be held accountable, and we require licenses so that drivers are known to understand the laws and safety rules before they can legally operate a vehicle. Cars can be dangerous if they are operated unsafely, so it makes sense to know a person knows how to drive before you let them out on the road. And if a car is involved in an accident or a crime, it's important to be able to check the registration and know who it belongs to. I don't see anything wrong with doing the same for guns, but you get gun rights folks in an uproar even suggesting it. They always think it's the first step toward taking away their constitutional rights. Wrong. It's about responsibility and accountablility.

I don't advocate banning guns at all. But anyone who thinks they are making themselves safer by bringing a gun into their homes may be mistaken. 30,000 people are shot dead each year in the US and 65,000 are injured by a gun. About 17,000 of those killed are suicides. About 12,000 are murders, many of which are famly members or friends killing eachother during an argument with a gun that's in the house. There are about 700 accidental deaths and about 300 shot by police. I couldn't find statistics for the number of crimes that are foiled by using a gun to defend yourself. Does anyone know? I doubt that as many crimes are stopped as there are people killed --- let me know if you find differently. But it seems like if you have a gun in your house, if anyone is killed, the person most likely to be killed is not an intruder --- it's you or someone else shooting themselves, followed by a family member or friend murdering another family member or friend.

A buddy of mine has one of these...here in California. Not the same brand; he said a friend of his brought it back from Australia years back.

Things are pretty damn cool, they sound just like a firecracker going off. Only real use is for shooting beers cans off of the deck, which is fun. :) Lethal? Potentially; at close range, in a specified location.

W/e Ive seen videos of elderly people shooting deringers. And Ive shot several high caliber hand guns INCLUDING a 45 so yeah. They dont make handguns that people cant shoot, at least that men cant anyway.

^ Sexist. ;)

I can handle a gun just like any man. My father is an avid hunter/fishermen and he taught me about guns and gun safety while I was very young.

One of the best things he ever did. He's a NRA member and I'm looking to follow suit.

(btw I'm partial to pump action shot guns, the power with that recoil is amazing)

Guns are just bad in general but I think they should be banned for personal use. Its ok if you do target practice but recreational hunting is bad. The problem is that there is no way of allowing ownership of firearms and controling what people do with them.
It's only ok to use weapons if there is a serious threat posed and only Police should be able to use them.
We need to sort out the bad people in this world first to the point that we all follow the philosophy of not doing anything to anyone else or anything else (ie. animals) that we wouldn't want done to ourselves before we ban guns all together. But obviously this will never happen.