Thread: A class Thumbhole stocks , what do you prefer

Can anyone actually articulate what the intent of the law is?

People are so fixed on the stock and no where do the police say you must use a particular stock or what makes a particular stock A-cat it just must not have a pistol grip as defined .( you can use an any butt stock and no grip if you like )

Interpretation
This is the definition of a pistol grip taken of the police website so if the stock does not fit the description it does not have a pistol grip so is fine .

(1) In this order, unless the context otherwise requires,—


free-standing grip, in relation to a firearm, means a grip that,—

(a) is designed to be gripped by the whole or most of the trigger hand of a person firing the firearm; and


(b) is (if any trigger guard is disregarded) structurally connected to the firearm at only one point; and


(c) when deployed, protrudes from the firearm in a direction that is closer to being perpendicular to the barrel than to being parallel to it; and


(d) is neither—

(i) a thumb-hole stock; nor


(ii) a stock of the type commonly described as a Dragunov stock or Dragunov-style stock

Originally Posted by gimp

Can anyone actually articulate what the intent of the law is?

To annoy people?

To confirm that the inventors of the changes shouldn't be allowed to play with wooden blocks, much less make laws?

The whole thing is bloody daft. All it does it make it harder to handle the rifle safely, which seems a bit at odds with general thinking on firearm safety....