CNBC vs. the Remington 700

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

On October 20, CNBC ran a very emotional investigative reporting piece on the Remington 700 bolt action rifle. Their claim is that the gun misfires frequently and causes serious injury and in a couple cases death. For the CNBC piece you can go to the following website and for the Remington rebuttal you can to this website

Please note that our VP (GS2AC), Jim Barry, says he owns 3 of these rifles and has never had a problem with them and feels they are extremely accurate.

Some of my personal observations from watching the show:

1.        A child has died because of an alleged misfire. The shooter/mother claims she took the gun off safety and it fired without having her finger on the trigger. There is no proof that this is true or for that matter untrue. However the question was never asked as to why the gun was not pointed in a safe direction while loaded and taken off safety. Tragic yes, but is it the fault of the manufacturer or a careless accident? Maybe both and maybe not the manufacturer.

2.        A supposed gun expert who claims the gun misfires is seen holding the gun with bolt closed and finger on trigger with the gun in a non-shooting position. Can he really be an expert?

3.        A trial lawyer and his expert witness are frequently interviewed. They clearly have the goal of getting lots of money for his clients in litigation from Remington. They certainly cannot be objective.

4.        In an attempt to try show some balance, an interviewed shooter says he has never had a problem and that the gun is one of the most accurate. This is a very short piece and not representative of the majority of the presentation.

5.        An insider is interviewed and talks about the “Remington way”. He casts dispersions on the Remington management and their motivations. Remington claims he was never an employee. If that is true why didn’t CNBC check first before claiming he was an ex-employee? Or did they really care as long as this witness said what they wanted to hear?

6.        A retired Remington engineer is interviewed and says he wanted to fix the malfunctioning trigger and Remington wouldn’t let him because it cost too much. He looks quite senile; plus not credible because he comes across like a stereotypical disgruntled ex-employee.

7.        Scenes are shown with a shooter who is supposedly a military or police sniper whose face is blurred over to mask his identity with a rifle that repeatedly misfires by releasing the safety or touching the bolt. Remington in their rebuttal asks if the rifle was modified and who the shooter was? What proof does CNBC have that the test was not staged? This reminds me of attempt by NBC (the parent of CNBC) some years ago to claim a pickup truck was unsafe. To prove it they recorded one catching on fire during a simulated accident. It was later proven by the manufacture of the truck that an explosive charge was set off remotely by NBC to stage the event. NBC was forced to make a public apology or face a multimillion dollar liable suit that they were sure to lose.

So the question in mind is why did CNBC put out this slick piece of yellow journalism? I can only speculate. Near the end of the show I think they played their hand. They talk about the fact that firearms safety is not regulated by the federal government as say children’s toys, clothing, etc is regulated. I think the goal is to get us upset enough to ask Congress for a new regulatory agency. I think this is another front of attack for gun banners.  Since outright gun bans are failing because of reassertion of our 2nd Amendment Right’s, backdoor methods are being tried to infringe on our rights and ban firearms. A federal regulatory body in charge of ensuring guns are safe could do a lot to achieve gun bans. One only has to look to California as the working example. Large numbers of new and old hand guns are now banned for sale by not being on an approved list under the guise of safety.

We must stay vigilant and not be fooled by these attempts. It will take a continuous effort on the part of all freedom loving Americans to fight back. If the Remington 700 has a real design flaw, then we won’t get it from this very biased show.

This entry was posted in Firearms, Equipment and Ammo, Safety and Training and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to CNBC vs. the Remington 700

  1. Mike Ebel says:

    I have never had an accidental discharge, in my opinion there is no such thing. The proper term is negligent discharge. Never point any firearm at anything you do not want to destroy. I also like how the CNBC article did not work at all with Remington, I also would not be surprise if most of the guns that were claimed to discharge without the trigger being engaged were either not maintained properly or modified.

  2. Diamondback says:

    It’s a hit job plain and simple. I own several Rem700s now and many others over the last 35 years. I’ve never ever has one single solitary incident.

    Here’s what I think is happening. 1. People are either making DIY trigger adjustments or letting “friends” etc. adjust the trigger. A trigger adjustment is the first thing I do with almost every rifle I acquire BUT I take it to a professional gunsmith for the adjustment.
    2. Poor muzzle discipline.
    3. Lax safety compliance.
    4. Not paying attention.

    While I’m sure there’s a defective rifle coming off the line on occasion – nobody’s PERFECT – I’m also sure it’s the exception and not the rule.

    I’ve simply owned and used too many Rem700s over my lifetime to believe this BS.

    p.s. I did see the documentary on cable.

  3. Mercutio says:

    I have a 700 and have had a problem with unwanted firing, but not with the stock trigger.

    Early on I managed to break the Remington trigger while cleaning it ( crappy design – just begs to be broken – but that’s another story).

    So I replaced it with a Jewel. Once fitted and adjusted, it worked fine…until you actually fit it into the stock; then with the safety on, you could depress the trigger and get a break, but it didn’t actually fire… until you released the safety which did cause it to fire.

    Turns out that I needed to remove material from the stock to give the trigger assemby more clearance. Since the manufacture of stocks seem to be kind of sloppy (on the SPS at least) I wonder if something similar can happen with the standard trigger.

  4. Jenny says:

    Excellent sieres. Thanks, Brad.I’m reminded again, the justice system we have in place has little to do with justice and much to do with legalities.

  5. SlyDeNiro says:

    “he looks quite senile” Are you kidding me??

    And what of those slacker, gun hobbyists called Navy SEALS and Special Forces when they spoke of accidental discharges??

    You’re a clown

  6. SlyDeNiro says:

    “Please note that our VP (GS2AC), Jim Barry, says he owns 3 of these rifles and has never had a problem with them and feels they are extremely accurate.” Ummm….what does “extremely accurate” have to do with the price of squid in China? It’s a trigger issue?

    Read what seasoned Model 700 users are saying:

    How could you post such drivel? If Remington exercised ‘the American Way’ they would have announced a recall 10 years before the CNBC documentary aired.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *