CNBC to claim Remington has been selling defective weapons for many many years
- Thread starter ZeroJunk
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
New member
Interesting. An alleged safety violation equates with not being trustworthy?
I have yet to meet a gun owner that hasn't violated a safety rule, most having violated them multiple times in their lives. So if we can't trust Scott Cohn because you say he is violating a safety rule, then no gun owner can be trusted, right? They have all violated a rule at some point in time.
Sorry, the logic just isn't there.
I recall one of these cases involved a woman who was loading or unloading her .243 and something about the safety and an AD. The tragic result was her son was fatally hit.
Once upon a time I was hunting with two of my brothers.One of them had less experience ,it was rather new to him.I noticed him stuffing rounds in the mag while the muzzle was pointed at my other brothers head.
I asked him to follow me a few trees away,and I quietly,respectfully,suggested another way.
A good friend of mine uses the no-safety bolt shrouds and no safety triggers on the bolt guns he builds for himself.It is his way of never trusting a safety.
He always has an empty chamber till he sees game.Then he quietly functions the bolt.It can be done.
I don't do it quite that way,I have,and use safeties.But I have an empty chamber a lot.Especially around folks.
I believe if I hurt someone because I trusted his/her life to a safety,any safety,I blew it.DO NOT trust Remingtons safety.Or savages safety,or Winchester's safety,etc.Then nobody gets shot.
Once upon a time I was hunting with two of my brothers.One of them had less experience ,it was rather new to him.I noticed him stuffing rounds in the mag while the muzzle was pointed at my other brothers head.
I asked him to follow me a few trees away,and I quietly,respectfully,suggested another way.
A good friend of mine uses the no-safety bolt shrouds and no safety triggers on the bolt guns he builds for himself.It is his way of never trusting a safety.
He always has an empty chamber till he sees game.Then he quietly functions the bolt.It can be done.
I don't do it quite that way,I have,and use safeties.But I have an empty chamber a lot.Especially around folks.
I believe if I hurt someone because I trusted his/her life to a safety,any safety,I blew it.DO NOT trust Remingtons safety.Or savages safety,or Winchester's safety,etc.Then nobody gets shot.
There's a good summary on this site.
www.drinnonlaw.com/Texas-Defective-Remington700.php
"Defective Remington 700 Bolt-Action Rifle"
"Remington’s Defective Trigger System
A Historical Summary
Extensive Claims and Litigation History"
__________
edited to add: There are scans of an old Business Week article, too.
www.drinnonlaw.com/docs/Business-Week-Article-Remington.pdf
www.drinnonlaw.com/Texas-Defective-Remington700.php
"Defective Remington 700 Bolt-Action Rifle"
"Remington’s Defective Trigger System
A Historical Summary
Extensive Claims and Litigation History"
__________
edited to add: There are scans of an old Business Week article, too.
www.drinnonlaw.com/docs/Business-Week-Article-Remington.pdf
hardworker
New member
Come on guys, remington's not that bad. I've got a 522 viper and it's one of the most reliable guns I've ever seen. If I ever know I'm gonna need a gun that will jam with every shot fired, this is it. It makes a good decoy gun to leave out in hopes the bad guys will find it and try to shoot me with it.
I witnessed a Rem 700 firing when the safety was moved to fire in order to unload the chamber and also had a Win Mod 70 fire when the safety was moved to fire to unload the chamber. The Win 70 was mine and I took it to a gunsmith and he found corrosion in the trigger/safety group and cleaned it up. I had purchased it at a gunshow and not fired it much before the problem but there was no corrosion on the outside. Both cases show importance of muzzel control. I still own 3 Rem 700 but stay aware of what can happen.
gaseousclay
New member
I only saw the trailer and while it does raise a lot of safety questions, I think fault does lie with both Remington and the gun owners. some of the circumstances smacked of carelessness. there was one bit about a guy who took his rifle out at home, it discharged and the bullet went through the wall and hit his wife in the head, killing her. my first question was, why the hell was his rifle loaded and why wasn't it pointed in a safe direction? another segment told of a guy and his father on a hunting trip in Alaska. the dad's rifle went off and shot his son through the wrist. he didn't die but he wound up with $300k in medical bills. again, where was the barrel of the rifle pointed? if his son was shot through the wrist it implies (to me anyway) that he wasn't carrying the rifle properly. First, Remington needs to fix the problem so more of these 'accidental discharges' aren't happening and second, there needs to be less carelessness on the part of the gun owner.
Double Naught Spy
New member
You are kidding, right? Why was it loaded? You see something wrong with having loaded guns?
Niantician
New member
Just watched the whole show. Whether you think it's a design flaw or careless handling by the owners. A rifle should not do that. And Remmington should be much more truthfull about the problem. Shame on them!
nefprotector
Moderator
Just watched this Episode for the first time. The inventor of the gun said that there was a flaw. Why would he lie? And why did it take so long to fix it with the X trigger?
Double Naught Spy
New member
The show did not appear to depict gun owners in a bad light. That was a good aspect of the show.
What I gathered from the show was that even if the guns were not improperly designed or improperly built, if your gun ended up in the rain while hunting or got too dusty, then the extremely delicate mechanism could fail to work properly and the gun could discharge when the safety was disengaged (older guns) or when the bolt was moved. In short, either you need to be an expert on the gun to sufficiently break down the fire control system completely, service it, and re-assemble it or you need to have this done by a gunsmith to make sure the moisture did not cause any rusting or that no bits of dirt are present.
From everything presented, Remington has known of the problem since before the gun went into full production in the 1940s as the designer of the fire control warned the company of the problem at that time and suggested a fix. He expressed his concerns until he retired and even numerous times afterward. CNBC even interviewed Walker himself and he said as much.
It is hard to blame all the problem reports on the shooters themselves. Remington apparently has had thousands of complaints about the problem, though only a small fraction have resulted in injury or death.
What I gathered from the show was that even if the guns were not improperly designed or improperly built, if your gun ended up in the rain while hunting or got too dusty, then the extremely delicate mechanism could fail to work properly and the gun could discharge when the safety was disengaged (older guns) or when the bolt was moved. In short, either you need to be an expert on the gun to sufficiently break down the fire control system completely, service it, and re-assemble it or you need to have this done by a gunsmith to make sure the moisture did not cause any rusting or that no bits of dirt are present.
From everything presented, Remington has known of the problem since before the gun went into full production in the 1940s as the designer of the fire control warned the company of the problem at that time and suggested a fix. He expressed his concerns until he retired and even numerous times afterward. CNBC even interviewed Walker himself and he said as much.
It is hard to blame all the problem reports on the shooters themselves. Remington apparently has had thousands of complaints about the problem, though only a small fraction have resulted in injury or death.
engineermike
Moderator
I don't believe i'll be giving Remington any of my money. I'm voting with my feet. I believe there are enough manufacturers besides Remington to satisfy my needs.
Just another biased piece of crap from the NBC network, designed to lull suckers into hating a gun company. Apparently it has already worked on some 
Seriously? Millions of these have been out there for many years and how many accidents? Compare this to any other prolific firearm model. Remington has a response on their site. Don't be so quick to judge. A tool is only as dangerous as the person using it!
Hell, I'd buy another one tomorrow, just to spite the idiots that work at NBC.
Seriously? Millions of these have been out there for many years and how many accidents? Compare this to any other prolific firearm model. Remington has a response on their site. Don't be so quick to judge. A tool is only as dangerous as the person using it!Hell, I'd buy another one tomorrow, just to spite the idiots that work at NBC.
Last edited:
Just saw the CNBC segment
[Also posted in the Law Section of TFL]
It was very alarming. While I do not like bolt action rifles because of my being lefthanded and taught to fire righty in the Army. What concerns me is that is that I am in the market for a semi Rem 750 in the 308 chamber and wondering if there is a similar or like problem in that model.
On TFL I have seen many posts calling the 740/742/7400 "jamamatics." Is Remington covering up on that issue also?
Has any one had jamming in the 750?
[Also posted in the Law Section of TFL]
It was very alarming. While I do not like bolt action rifles because of my being lefthanded and taught to fire righty in the Army. What concerns me is that is that I am in the market for a semi Rem 750 in the 308 chamber and wondering if there is a similar or like problem in that model.
On TFL I have seen many posts calling the 740/742/7400 "jamamatics." Is Remington covering up on that issue also?
Has any one had jamming in the 750?
bigalshootmupper
New member
Every good manufacturer makes defective products. I think Remington is better than average in having good quality. If you think all gun manufactureres don't make important design decisions that may make the gun a bit less safe, then you have no idea how companies operate. If you think every decent company out there makes every effort, spends that extra 5.5 cents more to make is slightly safer, then you have never worked with a real company. I work with a real company that receives rewards for best quality and there are always tradeoffs of price versus quality.
I don't know all of the facts, nor does CNBC. I am sure that 5.5 cents would easily be spent by Remington, even if is to ensure 100 out of 500,000,000 rifles don't discharge unintentionally. Remingtion hasn't admitted to anything and nothing has been proven. Remington is huge. They have a huge legal team. To be negligant for all those years and not spend a few cents to correct the design is definitely spinning the facts.
I see it as Remington doesn't want to admit that having to switch the safety to off to open the bolt was a bad design. I agree that that is an OK design. But the accusations that it can fire on its own are not proven and I can assure that if Remington found it to be an issue, they would spend the money quickly to remedy this. I watched the show and didn't see too many facts, mostly spins and emotions.
I don't know all of the facts, nor does CNBC. I am sure that 5.5 cents would easily be spent by Remington, even if is to ensure 100 out of 500,000,000 rifles don't discharge unintentionally. Remingtion hasn't admitted to anything and nothing has been proven. Remington is huge. They have a huge legal team. To be negligant for all those years and not spend a few cents to correct the design is definitely spinning the facts.
I see it as Remington doesn't want to admit that having to switch the safety to off to open the bolt was a bad design. I agree that that is an OK design. But the accusations that it can fire on its own are not proven and I can assure that if Remington found it to be an issue, they would spend the money quickly to remedy this. I watched the show and didn't see too many facts, mostly spins and emotions.
Niantician
New member
I keep thinking about the lengths Ruger went to, to fix their SR9. They lost a lot of money and a lot of PR. But they did the right thing. And to those that say this is just a biased report, and anyone who believes it is a sucker, well. Hehe. The jury is still out... But in the end, someone will be labeled a sucker. That's for sure. Either the people who saw this report and took some type of action to mitigate a possible danger. Or the people who didn't. We will see But I would always put safety over brand loyalty. I think an independent third party investigation is in order.
gaseousclay
New member
no, i'm not kidding. common sense dictates that you keep your firearm unloaded at all times. unless you live in Iraq/Afghanistan/Chechnya or some crappy neighborhood with high violence, you have no business keeping your gun loaded. duh. and I hope to god you're not yanking my chain. seriously
Double Naught Spy
New member
So much for common sense.
I take it that you missed the video footage of several guns discharging when the trigger was not being pulled, but when the bolt was starting to be manipulated. I take it that you also missed the part about the Remington expert on the stand in the case of the Texas guy (who blew his own foot off) where the gun being demo'd by him "fired" without his finger being on the trigger. So not proven despite being clearly demonstrated?
Last edited:
- Status