Remington MSNBC Story 20 October 2010

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by Boss Hoss, Oct 21, 2010.

  1. Yes -- Remington Should Have Taken Care Of This Years Ago I will buy Other Products Just Not 700's

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
  2. No -- I Do Not Believe the Information Provided In The Story

    6 vote(s)
    66.7%
  3. No -- I Will Still Support Remington No Matter What The Outcome Of This

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
  4. Yes -- Remington Should Be Held Accountable No More Money From Me

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Boss Hoss

    Boss Hoss Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,843
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    This is for those who watched the entire story from start to finish. Please do not respond if you did not view the story personally.

    As a result of the information presented by MSNBC and yes I do not like them very much either however, the information presented was very enlightening to say the least. As a result of this there is going to be a flurry of legal activity and possibly even Legislative activity put forth.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2010
  2. Kevin Thomas

    Kevin Thomas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,256
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Boss,

    Missed the original story here. Is it posted somewhere we can view it now? Never mind, just found it!

    KT
     

  3. Len Backus

    Len Backus Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    First of all, I absolutely hate the use of so called journalism to try cases in the media. And I don't care if the product is bubble gum, tennis shoes, cars or guns. It is inherently inaccurate and unfair.

    Secondly, in this case (or any case) I urge you all to slow down in forming opinions until days and weeks have passed as Remington has a chance to put forth their rebuttal.

    Imagine if your were under trial and the prosecution presented its case and your lawyer was not allowed to present your case before the jury was "POLLED". And how can you ask that respondents watch the MSNBC video before replying to the POLL without also asking them to read or watch the defendant's response?

    I have no opinion so far and I don't know how the shooting public can have enough facts to answer a very public poll without taking the time to dig for facts a little first.

    Len Backus, Publisher
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.