umm........... aren't they supposed to fire when the safety is disengaged??
It happen to my partner and I at the last match we were at.
This is really, really bad media for them..
Remington declined comment
It would add around 5 cents to the production costs so Remington scrapped it.
Five cents in 1948, IIRC. That equals just a few more dollars these days. They estimated it would cost ~$500M for a full recall today (IIRC), which is more than the total company assets. 5 million rifles sold at an average fixing cost of $100 per rifle.
Before I go any further, let me stipulate that I am NOT defending Remington. The evidence as presented in the report is pretty damning. Videos of LEO and border patrol demonstrating the malfunction were pretty telling, as was an instructor from a precision shooting school who said it was so common that they actually named the issue and trained around it. At the court hearing for the Texas man who shot his foot off, the gun actually malfunctioned on the witness stand-- although they weren't clear as to why a LIVE ROUND was allowed in the chamber. Which leads me to my next point.
Whether the gun ADs (as this is certainly criteria for that, as opposed to ND) or not, it's only going to kill or injure if it's aimed at another person. Shot through a trailer, shot through a wall or shot in the foot, the gun was both loaded AND pointed in an unsafe direction. According to the CNBC report, Remington's "Ten Commandments of Gun Safety" were the alternative to fixing the problem. Even if that's true, they are still valid and if strictly followed, would prevent a lot of head and heartache.