CNBC Attack on Remington

[de-evoproject]

Your missing my point, of course you should always be aware of muzzle direction. Remington put out a product that doesn't work and does not do what they tell you it will do. How about this.... Your in your tree stand a world class buck comes out, as you go to release the safety the gun goes off, the deer runs away and you loose your chance at a record buck. You then find out that the gun maker new about this problem but did nothing to correct it. Your telling me you wouldn't be on the phone calling Rem raising 18 different kinds of hell. If you say no I call BS. The safety does not work, the safety does not work on an item that is very dangerous Remington knew about this, let me repeat that "REMINGTON KNEW ABOUT THIS", and yet to save a nickle they chose to still produce the product and sell it, and have the balls to say nothing is wrong with the safety. When the designer himself told them about it.

Oh i'm with you. Yes i would be raising vocal tone, blood pressure and cane on that phone call. They would be ABSOLUTELY 100% TOTALLY WITHOUT A DOUBT responsible for the discharge of the weapon.

HOWEVER!!

I would be responsible for where that round landed. I keep seeing the things that look to me like the equivalent of, "Well yeah she should have been pointing in a safe direction but since its a manfacturer defect the fact that she was not practicing safety is now null and void and she is relieved of all responsibility that would normally be associated with accidentally shooting and killing another human being"

This manufacturer defect is a big part of why we practice gun safety in the first place. So that when something like this happens, no one gets hurt. If you could be 100% without a doubt certain that your gun would NEVER fire without you pulling the trigger, where would be the harm in pointing it anywhere you please as long as you don't touch the trigger?

 

[spyglass]

Another point being missed here is this.....she had NOT begun to actually unload the rifle, she merely disengaged the safety (necessary to work the bolt on this model). As the narrator said, these folks were experienced with their guns, so we don't know where she would've pointed the muzzle when she began the procedure. Personally, I'm sure she & her hubby were competent handlers, especially since the kiddos were along and were being shown proper shooting and safety methods.

 

[surjimmy]

Here's another food for thought. Everyone of us that conceal carry point our weapon in an unsafe direction every time we arm ourselves. We keep our finger out of the trigger guard and rely on the safety to do it's job. I carry a 1911 and I sure wouldn't carry it if I couldn't rely on the safety to do it's part.

 

[shotty]

Where is a safe direction? The ground? Hell no, bullet could have ricohet off of a stone in the ground killing someone. This woman took reasonable precaution of pointing her gun in a safe direction. Remington did settle out of court on this one.

 

[finnimus]

The gun being pointed in a safe (or unsafe) direction does not change the fact that the gun discharged when it was not supposed to/designed to discharge. It doesn't matter where it was pointed. The law doesn't require her to point the gun at the ground or in a "safe direction." However, the law does require the gun to function in a safe manner. I think everyone will agree that a gun firing when it is not supposed to fire is unsafe, regardless of where it is pointed.

 

[alank2]

Hi,

Here's another food for thought. Everyone of us that conceal carry point our weapon in an unsafe direction every time we arm ourselves. We keep our finger out of the trigger guard and rely on the safety to do it's job. I carry a 1911 and I sure wouldn't carry it if I couldn't rely on the safety to do it's part.

Each mechanism is different, and thankfully most are far better designed and have some passive safety components to them.

Most modern pistols have a secondary safety mechanism such as a firing pin block which prevents the firing pin from moving forward past the breechface unless the trigger is held back.

Or the transfer bar in a revolver that will not allow the hammer to transfer its energy to the firing pin unless the trigger is held back putting the transfer bar in place.

One thing I've learned about firearms is that it is worth taking a look at how it works internally before buying one...

Good luck,

Alan

 

[imhntn]

Mine went off once when I took the safety off. I was hunting and had a good buck in front of me too. When I tried to bolt another round in the sear didn't catch the firing pin and the gun would not keep the hammer back. My problem was that the sear had gotten oily dirt gummed up around it and would not come up enough to catch the firing pin well. The cold weather that morning made it stick worse. I learned a good lesson about cleaning that day.

 

[okie2]

My 700 264 mag fired when I atempted to unload it. I was lucky I had it pointed up at the gun range and not killed some one.
the problem was that the trigger had oil in it.

 

[criticalbass]

My 700 264 mag fired when I atempted to unload it. I was lucky I had it pointed up at the gun range and not killed some one.
the problem was that the trigger had oil in it.

The problem was a bad design feature that has been known for decades. (unfortunately nobody bothered to tell you) CB

 

[Glocktogo]

I had a factory Timney trigger on a muzzleloader that froze up one time. Fortunately I was just snapping percussion caps to clear the barrel of any moisture before loading, but the gun was still pointed in a safe direction. Still startled me when it popped before I was ready. Needless to say I went home and tore it down to fix the trigger instead of hunting with it that morning.