CNBC Attack on Remington

[ProBusiness]

Does this only apply to guns made before _______? Is the Remington 710 model included? Is the problem only on guns that require you to move the safety to 'off' before you can unload it?

 

[308shooter]

So whats the deal I saw the preview on the news. I've never had a problem with my 700 there great rifles. Been in service for forever whats the new;s deal... Does Remington not sell there rifle to the gooberment for the right price and now the news is butt hurt?

 

[spyglass]

I'm really surprised at how dense some of the individuals posting here are....

 

[308shooter]

I'm really surprised at how dense some of the individuals posting here are....

Are you referring to me?

 

[spyglass]

The ones who keep saying she pointed the gun at her boy.....the show will air again....watch it and pay close attention to what happened.

 

[criticalbass]

Remington has known about this for about forever. So has much of the knowledgable shooting community. There is a problem with the design that occasionally causes the gun to fire when the safety is disengaged, and that's unacceptable.

Both of my 700s, and I love them dearly, have aftermarket triggers/safeties that do not have the potential to have the problem.

Unlike many here, I watched the whole thing. Seemed pretty straightforward to me, though I don't see left wing plots wherever I look, unlike some.

Remington came off looking bad, and they should have. Someone posted on here maybe a year ago about his dislike for the 700 because of this problem. It's there, and Remington should have addressed it long ago. Probably felt it was cheaper to pay the occasional judgment and get agreement to have it sealed as they have done in numerous cases.

I am disturbed by the knee jerk defense on this forum of a company that does not deserve defending. I do not see how this has second amendment connections. The dead kid's dad still shoots, though his mom seems to be a bit of a basket case, and why not?

But, again, the weapon has a defective design and it is widely known. The government guys who use it know, and so does Remington. What would have cost five cents to fix (plus tooling--remember the design was already done) would now cost over $75 according to the program.

If I need to put on my Nomex suit, let me know. (damn! It doesn't fit any more. Neither does the racecar.) CB

 

[de-evoproject]

The ones who keep saying she pointed the gun at her boy.....the show will air again....watch it and pay close attention to what happened.

I think most of the guys here understand she wasn't exactly pointing at her son blantantly and that he was behind the trailer out of sight. The issue that most are taking here is that she failed to keep it pointed in a KNOWN SAFE direction.

Not pointing the weapon in a known unsafe direction is only half the rule. The other half is to make sure you are pointing in a direction that is verified safe. She didn't know what was behind the trailer, so she should have pointed it elsewhere. Like the ground.

I am disturbed by the knee jerk defense on this forum of a company that does not deserve defending. I do not see how this has second amendment connections. The dead kid's dad still shoots, though his mom seems to be a bit of a basket case, and why not?

I'm with you here to a degree. Yes, Remmington should be expected to fix this problem and held accountable for it. However, blaming a gun company for a death that really should be attributed to a lack of muzzle awareness and attention to basic gun safety sounds a lot like a long term play at more gun control and less second amendment for all.

Any story that paints guns as the problem rather than the people behind them is another feather in the cap of the anti-gun crowd.

 

[Drgnracin72]

I'm really surprised at how dense some of the individuals posting here are....

The ones who keep saying she pointed the gun at her boy.....the show will air again....watch it and pay close attention to what happened.

i concur wholeheartedly, but you cant talk sense into some people..... as they say, "you can't fix stupid"

 

[ignerntbend]

You're a saftey conscious deer hunter sitting in a tree. You run out of shooting light, so you start to unload your 700 in a safe direction. The gun goes off and knocks you off your perch. No big deal, you're wearing your safety
harness, as a safe person should. All that happens is you bump your head a little. You don't blame the rifle do you?

 

[spyglass]

Well, we can go around this safe direction business ad infinitum...the real issue is that the decision-making individuals at the DuPont-owned Remington concern KNEW decades ago this was potential, possibly even likely, defect, and yet elected not to fix it or make it public. That is corporate malfeasance....remember, they had received thousands of letters from 700 owners of that very problem occurring....yet they tried to say it was "mishandling" or "improper maintenance". Perhaps in a few instances, yes....but not that many, for that long.

5 million of them out there and only thousands malfunctioned? How many of the millions of Toyotas had unintended acceleration problems? Only a few hundred, but look what happened. Toyota finally had to bite the bullet, after being aware of the problem for a while. They, and other auto companies as well, have learned it's best to step up and admit errors or oversights. If you're a 700 owner (or fan), just because the problem hasn't happened with your rifle, doesn't mean it won't. Her gun was an older model they'd had for some time, and she was thoroughly familiar with it...