Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="criticalbass" data-source="post: 1330936" data-attributes="member: 711">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</blockquote>

Verification