You can argue safe handling all you want, I'm not disagreeing with that aspect. The guns would fire by putting it from safe to fire. Would you call it negligent driving if your car rapidly accelerated simply by putting it into drive, resulting in you possibly hitting something/someone? To sit there and say "Remington cant fix what isn't broken..." and in the same sentence call people stupid, well I'm sorry anybody who believes when you remove the safety and the gun fires is normal must fall into that group as well.
Possible deadly defect linked to Remington 700
- Thread starter madshawn
- Start date
You can argue safe handling all you want, I'm not disagreeing with that aspect. The guns would fire by putting it from safe to fire. Would you call it negligent driving if your car rapidly accelerated simply by putting it into drive, resulting in you possibly hitting something/someone? To sit there and say "Remington cant fix what isn't broken..." and in the same sentence call people stupid, well I'm sorry anybody who believes when you remove the safety and the gun fires is normal must fall into that group as well.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
R&D, design, and quality control on any product today, serves to enhance function, reliability and safety. Even at that, there's always going to be that small percentage of instances and examples of failure. With the previously mentioned production controls, we can only hope to minimize these failures. In addition, with some of the instances of failure and accidental discharge posted about on this thread, I would like to know what honest conditions and of handling and reasonable maintenance those particular firearms had been subjected to prior to the failure.
Just how many 700's fall into this category? You state it as if there were thousands when it may have been only a few... I don't know... but I do know of some cases where it was claimed it happened and no one could duplicate it... it probably didn't happen... The recall for faulty safeties was many years ago and it was a large recall of certain serial numbers... but not all recalled rifles had faulty safeties, they just fell in the potential group in that manufacturing time period. Personally I never came across any with this safety defect but I know of one smith who did.
But Remington has done everything possible to correct every 'problem' that is presented to them. Remington can't fix what isn't broken, they can only react to potential 'problems', and they have.
Sunchild2071
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Glen Park, AB
Lawsuit #1.
Clearly user error. Just about any trigger can be adjusted too low down to an unsafe condition. Especially for a field rifle. Obviously POS lawyers involved in this case.
Lawsuit #2.
This one sounds real shady. Questions could be asked whether this was a cover story up for stupidity right on down to a possible murder cover up. And obviously very unsafe muzzle control to say the least. POS lawyers here too ?
Remington clearly did everything to please the courts in both cases even though there wasn't a wide scale provable problem. I'd say that's responsible business practice after getting the shaft.
As for the unsafe claim leading up to the trigger redesign .... clearly POS lawyers involved here. There was no reason what so ever imo to redesign it. The original was and is an excellent and safe trigger.
Moral of the story ? There's LOTS of POS lawyers out there.
Clearly user error. Just about any trigger can be adjusted too low down to an unsafe condition. Especially for a field rifle. Obviously POS lawyers involved in this case.
Lawsuit #2.
This one sounds real shady. Questions could be asked whether this was a cover story up for stupidity right on down to a possible murder cover up. And obviously very unsafe muzzle control to say the least. POS lawyers here too ?
Remington clearly did everything to please the courts in both cases even though there wasn't a wide scale provable problem. I'd say that's responsible business practice after getting the shaft.
As for the unsafe claim leading up to the trigger redesign .... clearly POS lawyers involved here. There was no reason what so ever imo to redesign it. The original was and is an excellent and safe trigger.
Moral of the story ? There's LOTS of POS lawyers out there.
When you generalize it the way you have yes, in general there is nothing wrong. Just like in general, there is nothing wrong with Toyotas, but specifically, they had issues with several vehicles and got a bad rep for it. More importantly, Remington 700's had an issue that made them prone to firing when the safety was disengaged. The issue was brought to Remington internally and the company brushed it under the rug. It is what the company does to deal with the issue that is the true point to this story. I don't give two f@cks what caused the problem, mechanically or not or a certain production run, etc.. I don't care what anybody says about negligent discharge and you cant rely on safeties blah blah blah. If an item you are using does not perform the way it should, ie removing the safety and the thing fires, and a company knows of the issue and does nothing, THEY are negligent. Yes, it was eventually fixed, but a certain amount of time passed when they knew and did nothing! Are we done here now?
Last edited:
This is why we keep our guns locked up. So they can't get loose and shoot us...
I own a 700 from each trigger generation if you will, right now and not one of them has ever gone off on me . In fact I have a walker trigger than GunTech tuned that has travelled through a few rifles so far. Still good.
With that said, I buddy of mine had a Tikka that accidentally discharged when the safety was operated, twice. So, (you'll never believe this part...) He sent it in and they repaired it! I know right, crazy.
I own a 700 from each trigger generation if you will, right now and not one of them has ever gone off on me . In fact I have a walker trigger than GunTech tuned that has travelled through a few rifles so far. Still good.
With that said, I buddy of mine had a Tikka that accidentally discharged when the safety was operated, twice. So, (you'll never believe this part...) He sent it in and they repaired it! I know right, crazy.
Glad to hear it was fixed. It would have been a different story if he caused property damage or injured someone...
Most companies take responsibility quickly when these things happen.
if you read on the Gravel agency sub-forum the remington press release every it is well written and good explaination. i do not like the remington 700 but nothing to do with the press going after remington or the users being dum to point at people ... guess which firearms company they are going after that?
Just messin
I own a Remy 600 with the trigger. No problems so far. A lot comes down to maintenance. Don't know how many firearms I have bought from people that they said were clean as a whistle, only to open them up and find grease and wax and carbon and tree and branch debris (pine and spruce needles, bark etc.) from bolt and trigger assemblies, enough to blacken my workbench when flushed out and don't even ask how much oily carbon I have picked and dug out from around chambers and extractor ports. I wonder how there are not more failures to be honest the way people don't maintain their firearms.
