Engineering Ethics

140 Engineering Ethics: An Industrial Perspective

beginning of this chapter. The False Advertising statute for California is

given here:

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE

Division 7 General Business Regulations

§ 17500. False or misleading statements generally

It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any

employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to dispose of real or per-

sonal property or to perform services, professional or otherwise, or anything

of any nature whatsoever or to induce the public to enter into any obligation

relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated

before the public in this state, or to make or disseminate or cause to be made

or disseminated from this state before the public in any state, in any newspa-

per or other publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or

proclamation, or in any other manner or means whatever, including over the

Internet, any statement, concerning that real or personal property or those

services, professional or otherwise, or concerning any circumstance or matter

of fact connected with the proposed performance or disposition thereof,

which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise

of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading, or for any

person, firm, or corporation to so make or disseminate or cause to be so

made or disseminated any such statement as part of a plan or scheme with

the intent not to sell that personal property or those services, professional or

otherwise, so advertised at the price stated therein, or as so advertised. Any

violation of the provisions of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by

imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not

exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both that impris-

onment and fine. (California, 2005)

AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE

As already discussed earlier, stability problems began to surface

during the Bronco II’s 1981 design phase and 1982 verification phase.

The design goals to “reduce rollover propensity” and “respond safely

to large steering inputs which are typical of accident avoidance or

emergency maneuvers” could not be met during this project. In 1981,

Ford engineers suggested five proposals to increase Bronco II stability.

Adopting proposals three, four, or five would have caused the schedule

Ch11-P088531.qxd 2/22/06 11:47 AM Page 140