9 thoughts on “I Thought PLCAA Was Going to Stop This?”

  1. “The three most common scenarios for the fire control to malfunction are:

    – When the user cycles the bolt to eject a spent casing (Fire opening the bolt)”

    So these rifles are so dangerous, they can actually fire a spent casing?

  2. So, if you don’t follow the rules of firearm safety with a Rem 700, somebody can be hurt. Sounds like an ID-10T user malfunction to me.

  3. I think Remington warned me about this when I bought a rifle from them a few months ago, but it may have been the gun-store guy.

    In any case, a precision rifle, especially the kind that is used to shoot in non-controlled situations (by hunters and police), that may discharge when the safety is disengaged, is defective.

  4. Yeah, this doesn’t sound like a nuisance lawsuit, but a bonafide defective product lawsuit.

  5. So, they’re trolling for a class-action, yes.

    If it does, indeed, fire with the safety engaged, that’s a defect, and if anyone actually has been injured by that, Remington’s obligated to make them whole, so that’s fair.

    (Though the way those lawyers wrote that up you can easily forget that it’s a matter of accumulated crud in the firing mechanism; which suggests that simply cleaning the damned thing regularly should be adequate prophylaxis.)

  6. So after spilling mud, coffee, soda, and carpet glue on the floorboards, when my accelerator sticks and I rear-end a Prius, I should sue?

    “documents discussing the Walker Fire Control System when it was first designed in the 1940s signal the company’s knowledge of the dangers even then”
    and this is a rilfe in wide use by the police and military, and we’re just NOW beginning to hear about all this? huh?

  7. The sniper rifle of Uncle Sams Misguided Children is defective by design and no-one’s called Remington on it in 40 years? Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.

Comments are closed.