------------------
Death Before Dishonor

------------------
Death Before Dishonor

------------------
Larry

The father of the boy in Montana did not want a cash settlement along with the gag clause. He wanted Remington to do something. Now they did, and it costs the owners $20 to have it fixed, or at least the safey made so it does not lock the bolt.

[This message has been edited by Customstox (edited 03-08-2002).]

my bottom line is that the only safety that works on any gun is the gray matter between your ears
NEVER EVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOUR NOT WILLING TO DESTROY

the cbs news story centered around the woman who shot and killed her son.

my dad tought me long ago that there are no accidents where guns are concerned.

------------------
Death Before Dishonor

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul H:
Arguably no firearm has a safety, and should be treated thusly.

---

Excellent way to look at it.

I have a question for you:

What if you flick-off the safety on your Remington 700 which has the muzzle pointed at the ground, the rifle goes off (FOSR Fire On Safety Release) and the bullet ricochets and kills someone?

Was it your fault?

You had the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, correct?

Isn't it a reasonable assumption that a firearm can be desgined so that it won't inadvertantly discharge when the safety is released?

How else do you clear the chamber on a pre-1982 Model 700, except by taking the safety off?

Again, isn't it a reasonable expectation that a rifle shouldn't occasionally fire-on-safety-release?

The Remington 700 trigger/safety assembly is a seriously flawed design that could have and should have been fixed over forty years ago. Remington has obviously made a decision that it's cheaper to settle suits than fix rifles.

If we as hunters and second ammendment lover's don't hold our industry accountable we'll play right into the anti's hands and a bunch of beaureaucrats will regulate it more than it already is.

This isn't a "pro-gun", "anti-gun" issue... it's a plain and simple product safety issue... it just so happens the product is something which arouses a lot of emotion (pro and con)... this muddies a lot of very simple facts.

If the Remington Co. was a genuine lover of our right to bear arms they would have fixed this years ago rather than cynically exposing millions of 700 owners (and those around them) to this very real problem... all because of their bottom line.

I know the Barb Barber. I'm fortunate to count the Barber's as my friends. Barb grew up hunting and handling firearms. If she says her finger was not on the trigger, it wasn't on the trigger.

This is an all too common problem with the Model 700.

Brad

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 03-08-2002).]

just curious

------------------
>>>--------------------->
Toxophilie and carry a bent stick.
<---------------------<<<

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
If she says her finger was not on the trigger, it wasn't on the trigger.

---

Possibly. However, it WAS pointed in an unsafe direction, by anybody's standards.

Let me ask you a question now. Would you point a 3 position safety M70 (reknowned for being a "superior" design), or any other rifle, at your kid while the rifle was loaded?

Actually, your question should be "Would you point a 3 position safety M70 (reknowned for being a "superior" design), or any other rifle, at your HORSE TRAILER while the rifle was loaded? As I recall, the boy was behind the horse trailer which the bullet went through.( Correct me if I'm wrong here, anyone).
My opinion (like a'holes...everybody's got one) is that I want my bolt locked down and have actually bought old safties and put them on post '82 rifles. I adjust my Remington triggers to 3 1/2 pounds. This has proven safe to me. I've never had a problem. I have slammed the rifle butt on the floor and pulled the trigger with the safety on...done everything I could to screw them up and I couldn't do it. I did set the trigger way too light on a .25-05 one time and could make it fire by bouncing the butt on the floor. When set back out to 3 1/2 lbs this never happened again. While on the subject, CBS sure screwed up some of the facts. They said the Remington was repairing the bolt lock while, in fact, they are eliminating it. They also said that the rifle had been in production for 50 years. Unless they are including the 721/22 series , the 700 Rem. has been in production since 1962 and that's 40 years. They gave the impression that Remington was just now changing the bolt lock and ,in fact , this has been eliminated since 1982. More factual reporting by the media's number one gun hater...Mr. Rather.

Okay now is the time for someone to call me a Nut!

Rich Elliott

------------------
Ethiopian Rift Valley Safaris

[This message has been edited by Rich Elliott (edited 03-08-2002).]

There are two issues here:-

1) The issue surrounding the mechanical function of the rifle and Remingtons dealings with this.

2) Personal gun handling/safety issues.

I don't really know enough *facts* about either aspects to comment, but these issues are not one and the same...

Safeties suck big donkey dicks. They are an invitation to disaster. They cannot necessarily be depended on, and we all know it. Anyone who presumes to use a safety takes it upon himself to figure out what's going on, and how little he should trust it. The situation described above is not at all unusual with worn 1911's.

That said, the Remington malfunction described above (and the same one with the 1911) is one of the worst kind, obviously.

Anyone wonder why cops carried revolvers for so long, and why people with brains still often choose them?

A friend of mine accidentally killed himself doing something so stupid it's not worth describing, but it pointed up that most rifles and shotguns have "safeties" that aren't. Period.

There was so many in-accurate statements made concerning this issue I just had to make at leased one post and furnish this article.

This would make 2 dead and one person injured in one year in Gallatin County alone involving a Model 700 rifle.

Augustis ><>

"Hunters Death Rulled Accidental"

http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_v2.cfm?show=archivedetails&pnpid=311&om=0&ArchiveID=629204

[This message has been edited by rembo (edited 03-30-2002).]

They can still mess up, though... see the link below for more: http://hunting.about.com/library/weekly/aaGA_Thanksgiving2001a.htm (read about what happened on Sunday).

I've seen considerable documentation on the M700 issue, and I am convinced that Remington has been negligent. I just wish they'd do something worthy, rather than this safety recall "compromise."

-Russ

------------------
Russ Chastain
Hunting & Shooting Guide for About.com
Member, Southeast Outdoor Press Association
Web site: http://hunting.about.com
Hunting/Shooting Forum: http://forums.about.com/ab-hunting
Email: hunting.guide@about.com
Free Newsletter: http://hunting.about.com/gi/pages/mmail.htm
.........................................................

Augustis ><>

"Trigger Questions" Posted by jdllyons

http://www.serveroptions.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/002733.html

Did you show up just to keep this topic alive? What's your agenda? 5 posts, and you just want to keep bringing this one up. Your style reminds me a lot of Swamp's... post links to other stuff. Take it back to HA.

There have been several tries to delegate responcibility to Remington in these "CAUSED OCCURRENCES", they are NOT accidents. Perhaps the attitude of today is to shirk personal responcibility, but a firearm discharge is the responcibility of the person holding the firearm. I've seen family members desperately try to shove it off on someone else, perhaps in the hope it may reduce the guilt and pain they have. It seems to me that it always comes back and bites them. The loner it takes, the more destructive the bite. Pray for those in that situation and work like hell to insure it doesn't happen to your family. Good luck

------------------
BigBob

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad:
Gonehunting... Chic is right. You're ill-informed.

I have a question for you:

What if you flick-off the safety on your Remington 700 which has the muzzle pointed at the ground, the rifle goes off (FOSR Fire On Safety Release) and the bullet ricochets and kills someone?

Was it your fault?

You had the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, correct?

Isn't it a reasonable assumption that a firearm can be desgined so that it won't inadvertantly discharge when the safety is released?

How else do you clear the chamber on a pre-1982 Model 700, except by taking the safety off?

Again, isn't it a reasonable expectation that a rifle shouldn't occasionally fire-on-safety-release?

The Remington 700 trigger/safety assembly is a seriously flawed design that could have and should have been fixed over forty years ago. Remington has obviously made a decision that it's cheaper to settle suits than fix rifles.

If we as hunters and second ammendment lover's don't hold our industry accountable we'll play right into the anti's hands and a bunch of beaureaucrats will regulate it more than it already is.

This isn't a "pro-gun", "anti-gun" issue... it's a plain and simple product safety issue... it just so happens the product is something which arouses a lot of emotion (pro and con)... this muddies a lot of very simple facts.

If the Remington Co. was a genuine lover of our right to bear arms they would have fixed this years ago rather than cynically exposing millions of 700 owners (and those around them) to this very real problem... all because of their bottom line.

I know the Barb Barber. I'm fortunate to count the Barber's as my friends. Barb grew up hunting and handling firearms. If she says her finger was not on the trigger, it wasn't on the trigger.

This is an all too common problem with the Model 700.

Brad

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 03-08-2002).]

---

Did you show up just to keep this topic alive? What's your agenda? 5 posts, and you just want to keep bringing this one up. Your style reminds me a lot of Swamp's... post links to other stuff. Take it back to HA.

Gary
Why so touchy? I was just looking around when I came upon this thread that interested me as I thought the purpose of these forums were to express/share ideas with other people who share in the enjoyment of shooting sports and hunting,ask questions ETC...

The title of the thread is: "Whats Wrong With Remington 700 Safeties? Recall?" is it not?

As to your comment about my "style" of how I express my ideas and share info with others seems kind of low considering I dont even know you or recollect having dialog with you before (Have I Had The Pleasure?), are you in charge of censorship or have I broken some kind of rule at this apparently really fine site I discovered by chance?

WHATS THE DEAL! Does it offend you because I can bring facts to the table of the issue of what is wrong with the Remington safety and their position, or that I post more that one or two lines at one time?

<<What's your agenda?>>

To discuss this issue rationally in a mature manner, with factual documented info concerning historical events that took place since the conception of the Walker Patented Fire Control materialized In the public mainstream of commerce in 1948 in the Model 721-22 and into the present Models M/700 and M/7.

Is that a problem, do you have any further dialog to add concerning this issue so We can put this behind us and continue with the toppic of "Whats Wrong With The 700 Safety?"
Your position is clear to me, but like I said in another thread, I choose not to bury my head in the sand concerning this issue ;o)
Augustis/OUT for tonight. ><>

Brad

PS... well said Augustis...