Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Remington 700: Two Dozen Deaths
#1
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39762676/ns/...ss-cnbc_tv



Thought that was interesting, from a remmy 700 owner standpoint.
Reply
#2
For a bullet to hit someone, the gun it was fired from must have been pointed at them (richocets excepted)

That is a violation of Rule # 2 "NEVER let the muzzle of your gun point at anything you are not willing to destroy"



Guns are fallablle mechanisms made by fallable humans. Assume they will malfunction. Take the necesary precautions.
"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but rather the one most adaptable to change."

Charles Darwin



http://www.selfdefenseinitiative.com
Reply
#3
That's the same CPSC argument that outlawed lawn darts. After you couldn't buy them, we built our own.



Regulation != Safety
Men are, that they might have joy.
Reply
#4
It would be wonderful if the auto industry could brag that they had only 24 deaths in the past 50 years due to product failure.



or the local power conpanies

or the poultry industry

or the airline industry

how about the motorcycle industry

or......



It is a firearm, a mechanical device, which makes it prone to fatigue and failure. That is why we observe the previously sited safty rules.
Don't know what you're doing, do you?
Reply
#5
I watched some video of these guns malfunctioning, and personally, I think this is an absolutely unacceptable failure.



The obvious safety rules aside, this weapon platform is relied upon by law enforcement and military around the world.



Civilians aren't the only ones this weapon has malfunctioned on. Imagine this failure occurring during a hostage situation, and having the weapon fire when the operator takes it off safe? That scenario is unacceptable from my perspective.



I don't buy the "operator error" excuses that have been issued about this either. I'm very skeptical that the US Border Patrol, and Law Enforcement agencies, are THAT negligent in the maintenance of their weapons.



A gun should not be able to fire, if the trigger isn't pulled.



Ruger revised the design of the Single Six because the old versions could be fired by hitting the un-cocked hammer into the firing pin. The "New Model" single six has a plate that prevents this from being possible. That this fault was known about in the 1940's and NEVER addressed is pretty troubling. Especially since Ruger has demonstrated the ability to remedy similar situations on other weapons.



- Jesse
Welcome to the internet, you're probably taking it too seriously.

What you see is the result of the perspective you choose.

"Knowledge isn't wisdom unless it's empirical." - My own damn self.

Grand Rapids Michigan
Reply
#6
isn't this subject only concerning very old Remington Model 700...?



i thought they did something to the newer ones.





'always fun to grease (i mean defeat in targets, not lives) everyone on the range with a much cheaper Savage anyways.... <img src='http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pirate.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':pirate:' />



vec
Reply
#7
The SA Ruger wasn't defective. All the traditional SAs share this property. Proper Gunhandling involves leaving an empty chamber under the hammer on such Guns--and this alone is enough to render them safe.



Many expert Gunwriters like Elmer Keith and Skeeter Skelton loudly criticized the unnecessary modification of the Ruger Single Actions to a less traditional format.



{Personally, I look at my Ruger SA--and every other Gun that I own--as something that may someday, have to be used as a Weapon--and I'm glad to have six safely on board--as opposed to five.....}



But the old "Five Shooters" were in no way defective.



Y'all are right--The Remington 700 is Execrable. Anyone who has one, send it to me--and I'll be happy to dispose of it for you.



PM for my address, and other shipping details.



......RVM45 [Image: cool.gif][Image: thumbsup.gif][Image: cool.gif]
There are only Two Types of People in the World:



A.} People who are After My Guns;



and;



B.} People who are Not After My Guns.



Though I am forced to live in exile, in the Twenty-First century; I am still proud to be a Citizen of the Twentieth Century.



RVM45
Reply
#8
I haven't seen the video from MSNBC, but teeeveee companies airing shows about the Rem. 700 "safety," isn't new. I remember years ago seeing on "60 Minutes," CBS, the same accusations.



Just as Zengunfighter said, the only way a person can be shot and killed, or wounded, with ANY FIREARM, is if the retarded, moronic, brain dead idiot holding the loaded firearm, POINTS it at another person and fiddles around with the safety and trigger!!



"Here dude, hold my beer and watch this!" BANG!!



"Uhhhh, sorry 'bout that, dude. Damn! Makes a helluva hole, huh? At least you didn't spill much of my beer. "



Another reason almost never discussed is the fact that many "kitchen table gunsmiths" tinker with adjusting the safety and they do not have the knowledge and skill to do it correctly. Therefore, with that trigger adjusted to too light weight, it'll damn sure go off when that safety is pushed forward. As will almost any other bolt action rifle, including the vaunted pre-'64 Winchester 70.



How many of these numbskulls want to admit they played around with adjusting the safety on their rifle??



Millions of Remington 700 rifles sold and two dozen deaths because of imbecilic owners pointing the loaded rifles at persons???? Uhh, that is not even quantifiable.



I've owned three Rem. 700 rifles manufactured in various years. A .270 Win., a .308 Win., and a .30-'06. Not one has ever "gone off" when I pushed the safety forward. But... I gotta admit, I did not tinker around with the safety/trigger mechanisms, either.



I have no idea how many people I know who own Rem. 700 rifles, including two owned by my brother, and not one has ever "gone off" when the safety was pushed forward.



Anyway, anyone here who owns a Rem. 700 and is afraid of it, please let me know as I'll be more than happy to take it off your hands. At a "fire sale price," given that it is "broken." <img src='http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsup.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':thumbsup:' />



L.W.
"Always go straight forward, and if you meet the devil, cut him in two and go between the pieces." (William Sturgis, captain, clipper ship, 1830s.)
Reply
#9
I want to see how many of these problems occurred on guns that were "tuned."

I know exactly how to adjust the internals so that a Rem. 700 will fire on closing the bolt. I will not describe it. There is a reason that Remington says that their warranty is void if anyone other than a Remington certified armorer adjusts any component of the trigger assembly. Kitchen table gunsmiths going for a "magic sniper trigger" tune the engagement too fine. Personally I wouldn't mind a 12 pound trigger that broke like glass.



I'm also curious how many incidents would have been different if safe gun handling was practiced.





Muddyboots
Shared pain is lessened, shared joy is increased!

Thus do we refute entropy. -S. Robinson



Communication is a Survival Skill! So is critical thinking!





When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.



Reply
#10
[quote name='Muddyboots' date='21 October 2010 - 09:40 PM' timestamp='1287708044' post='492894']



I'm also curious how many incidents would have been different if safe gun handling was practiced.





Muddyboots

[/quote]





All of them, if just one rule, number 2, was followed.
"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but rather the one most adaptable to change."

Charles Darwin



http://www.selfdefenseinitiative.com
Reply
#11
[quote name='Muddyboots' date='22 October 2010 - 10:40 AM' timestamp='1287708044' post='492894']

I want to see how many of these problems occurred on guns that were "tuned."

I know exactly how to adjust the internals so that a Rem. 700 will fire on closing the bolt.

I'm also curious how many incidents would have been different if safe gun handling was practiced.

Muddyboots

[/quote]



I don't know the facts of every incident, but I reckon you've covered most of it.



I have a rack full of Remingtons & like any other brand they go through a thorough testing regime after any adjustments to the trigger.
Reply
#12
[quote name='zengunfighter' date='22 October 2010 - 11:22 AM' timestamp='1287710543' post='492900']

[quote name='Muddyboots' date='21 October 2010 - 09:40 PM' timestamp='1287708044' post='492894']

I'm also curious how many incidents would have been different if safe gun handling was practiced.

Muddyboots

[/quote]

All of them, if just one rule, number 2, was followed.

[/quote]

True
Reply
#13
I have had a MALFUNCTION- an honest to god mechanical problem- cause a gun to go off. Nothing of value was damaged as i DID obey rule #2, and had drilled myself to do so automatically.



I fist blamed MYSELF.. then took the gun out, as i had remembered SEEING my indexed trigger finger at the time of discharge.



The culprit? AFTERMARKET parts that had been in the gun 10 plus years, I bought it used. I soon learned alot about glock factory parts.



The "rules" exist to cover you if you blow ONE rule. But one is all you get. Glad i knew all 4!



I am amazed at the people who know less than nothing about a particular gun who will have at it with files and whatnot, and get pissed when i suggest LEARNING some thing about what the hell they were doing before diving in. They then bring the guns to me, sheepisly saying.."i don't know WHAT happened".
Reply
#14
Is a sniper aiming diligently at his (human) target, and waiting for the final "Go Ahead" to shoot, an exception to Rule Number Two?



In such an instance, couldn't the rifle firings the safety was moved "Off Safe" be a liability?



Granted, his would be a very rare occurrence.



.....RVM45 [Image: cool.gif][Image: thumbsup.gif][Image: cool.gif]



There are only Two Types of People in the World:



A.} People who are After My Guns;



and;



B.} People who are Not After My Guns.



Though I am forced to live in exile, in the Twenty-First century; I am still proud to be a Citizen of the Twentieth Century.



RVM45
Reply
#15
[quote name='RVM45' date='22 October 2010 - 06:17 AM' timestamp='1287742633' post='492968']

In such an instance, couldn't the rifle firings the safety was moved "Off Safe" be a liability?

[/quote]



That's what I was trying to point out in my earlier post. Seems to have been missed or ignored though.



- Jesse
Welcome to the internet, you're probably taking it too seriously.

What you see is the result of the perspective you choose.

"Knowledge isn't wisdom unless it's empirical." - My own damn self.

Grand Rapids Michigan
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)