Originally Posted by dave22
Sort of. My point is that not only did they know it was dangerous (what vehicle isn't?) but they new it would without a doubt kill people when it shouldn't. They saw proof of cars flipping and exploding before the first bolt went into the first production units. With plenty of time to fix it, and save the lives of their customers. Then they decided to go ahead and produce the deadly vehicle thinking it would save them money. They've done this AT LEAST three times and it's caused them to lose money every time. Why?
I understand, and that's why I said That any car company that makes a vehicle that they know could be safer, but they don't make it safer, and still produce the car, then they are doing the same think you think Ford is doing. They are all the same, whether you hear about it or not. Every vehicle model gets into accidents. Say for example that 2% of the occupants involved in a head on collision while driving a car with a 3 star crash test rating, but only 1% die in a vehicle with a 5 star rating, but a company knowingly produces a 3 star rated car anyway, then that means they are ok with an extra 1% of their customers dieing. They all know what crash ratings their cars will have before production, but yet they all make cars that aren't 5 star rated. Isn't this the same principle you said Ford does?
Also if Ford has much worse practices then other companies, then why are they not the most deadly vewhicles on the road?