Remington Strikes Back

CNBC is busily promoting a show which will purportedly show the 700 is a dangerous firearm. Remington isn’t taking it lying down. Also see this interview with Cam Edwards on NRA News.

[Video Removed due to autoplay. Here’s a link. Remington, guys, use YouTube. This looks like the same abomination of an app that NRA uses. Bad move.]

It’s well understood when it comes to journalistic integrity, NBC has none. I believe nothing of what the media says anymore without some independent facts to back it up. They’ve been lying to the American public for years, it’s just now they are getting caught.
Hat tip to Firearms Blog.

[Full disclosure, Neither Remington nor its parent company advertises on this site. I just really hate CNBC.]

6 Responses to “Remington Strikes Back”

  1. SidViscous says:

    I’m glad to see I’m not the only one that hates the NRA app as well.

    Big huge piece of gossa.

  2. You would think that NBC would learned the GMC truck lesson after almost 20 years.

  3. Harry Schell says:

    A lawyer friend found a website of a law firm trying to gather up all the cases they can to hammer Remington. I wonder if NBC will interview one of the lawyers for his take on the “evidence”.

    Sorry situation.

  4. DirtCrashr says:

    I seem to remember a similar Remington 700 hit-piece about fifteen years ago, but done by CBS – maybe they just pulled it out of the file cabinet and sold it to NBC.

  5. EKEMP says:

    Hi – my name is Eli and I do digital work for Remington.

    Though there are differing views, see Remingtons side of the story:

  6. Andy B. says:

    FWIW – I had a 700 ADL that would do that consistently. I bought the rifle used to tear down to use the action for a benchrest rifle with an after-market trigger, so I never bothered to diagnose the problem.

    The point being, it is a REAL problem, it DOES happens, but we don’t know whether it’s a problem with ten rifles or a hundred thousand rifles, or some number in between. Remington’s appeals to “proper maintenance” and “following the rules of safety” are lame, as it is a failure that should never take place short of there being a catastrophic failure of a component under extraordinary conditions. Wheeling out the old “hatchet job by a lefitist media” defense is not addressing the real issue; that there is SOME problem, and leaving it unsolved is not acceptable.