View Full Version : Is this Legal ~ Kydex grip on HK Clone?

09-25-2012, 2:40 PM
Is this legal? The space above the kydex grip wrap is not large enough to fit a whole thumb through, however there is a space there where the tip of my thumb can fit. I worry that this space will deem this setup illegal. I am not attempting to skirt the law and fire this weapon with the tip of my thumb protruding through this hole. Its not even comfortable to hold in this fashion, however I guess if it is a possibility that a thumb could fit there, someone might make the assumption that you are doing it.

The fabricator of this grip assured me that I SHOULD be okay, however out on the range with this rifle when a LEO taps you on your shoulder is not the time to hash out legal questions. Before heading out is the time to be 100% sure.

So...What do you think? Legal or No?


09-25-2012, 2:46 PM
It's certainly questionable. I'd fix it if I were you.

09-25-2012, 2:49 PM
Well, it would make a great law school hypothetical, but do YOU want to be the test case? it can be argued that you can't wrap your thumb around the grip so it's not a pistol grip, but it can also be argued to the contrary. In all likelihood, you will never have to test the theory. The only real question is what is your risk tolerance?

09-25-2012, 2:50 PM
As easy as that is to fix, it's not something I would consider leaving in it's questionable(looks like a thumbhole to me) state.

09-25-2012, 2:51 PM
It's not questionable at all. Is there a "pistol grip protuding below the action"? It is 100% within the letter of the law and does not fit the definition of PG under Ca law. That said, I'd probably talk to whoever made it and get him/her to make you one that fits better purely for cosmetic reasons.

09-25-2012, 2:55 PM
It still does not dimensionally fit the definition of a pg, so what is the problem?

Test case? For what? Featureless rifles?

Bobby Ricigliano
09-25-2012, 3:21 PM
This looks legal to me. All of my grip finned guns have a small gap that is too small to fit a thumb through. I'm just a simple LEO, not a lawyer, but I'd shoot that at any public range without reservation.

09-25-2012, 4:27 PM

09-25-2012, 4:39 PM
It's probably legal, but could involve some fast talking during a LEO interaction.

I personally wouldn't run it in this configuration and would ask the manufacturer to create another with the gap filled.

The definition of a thumbhole stock from http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/regs/fsor.pdf?:
978.20(e) - Thumbhole Stock
The proposed definition originally noticed to the public defined a thumbhole stock as “any stock
with any opening that enables the firearm to be grasped, controlled and fired with one hand.”
Comments received during the initial comment period (December 31, 1999 through February 28,
2000) stated that the term “any stock with any opening” is overly broad and ambiguous. The
Department agrees that any opening can include openings other than thumbholes. As a result, the
Department changed “any stock with any opening” to “a stock with a hole.” Significant public
input received during the initial comment period also addressed the subjectivity of the phrase
“fired with one hand.” It appears from the comments that it could be an arbitrary standard that
requires consideration of physical characteristics such as strength and dexterity that vary from
person to person. The Department accordingly determined its use would add confusion rather than
clarity to the definition. The definition was revised to specify the physical characteristic of a
thumbhole stock as “a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate the
stock,” and was noticed during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000).
The comments received during this 15-day notice raised additional challenges regarding the
definition of the term “penetrate.” In an effort to further clarify the definition, the Department
added the phrase “into or through” to the phrase “penetrate the stock.” The final revised
definition: “thumbhole stock means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to
penetrate into or through the stock” was noticed during the second 15-day comment period (July
12 through July 31, 2000). Although additional comments were received, none resulted in
substantial revision to the definition. However, the Department made a non-substantial revision
by adding “while firing” to make it explicit in the definition that the placement of the thumbhole
must allow the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.

The fin "grip" is not part of the stock, thus it shouldn't apply. But then much depends on the nature of a LEO/prosecutor/judge/jury to truly determine how far they could stretch the definition.

**Just to be safe, however, make damn sure that the fin does NOT attach to, or even touch, the buttstock.**

09-25-2012, 6:53 PM
Is it a MP5/40? can we see the whole thing ;)

09-25-2012, 10:02 PM

I have seen a mention of this line before, what is the actual law that explains this picture? The web of the hand must be above this line?

Is it a MP5/40? can we see the whole thing [IMG]

Hahaha... I prefer to keep my firearm pictures fairly anonymous nowadays.

09-25-2012, 10:44 PM
I have seen a mention of this line before, what is the actual law that explains this picture? The web of the hand must be above this line?

it's from the california code of regulations, specifically 11 CCR 5469 -- the section that contains definitions relevant to the assault weapons law.

"pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

i think you're on safe ground with that part. i also don't think it qualifies as a thumbhole stock because, well, it's not a stock.