Correction: No lawyer is dumb enough to go on the record, or to leave a signature on something that could reasonably create the impression upon discovery that they knowingly want or facilitated the creation of, less safe commercial planes.

However, buying Boeing stock, with the current management in place, is synonymous with wanting less safe commercial planes.

This was glaringly obvious where I took a course on engineering law. So much boiled down to “don’t put bad stuff in writing” more than “don’t do bad stuff in the first place.” The press or made a point to distinguish the way engineers think can get them in legal trouble (eg, trying to be open and transparent about design flaws). It kinda bummed me out.

It is? Boeing stock is half the value it was before the MAX crashes.

I wouldn't do it, but. I think it's not crazy to buy Boeing stock in the belief that they will figure their shit out and start building safer planes.

I can easily imagine them to be greedy enough though.

That's never the proposal but is often the outcome. Firing your engineers and outsourcing or eliminating large amounts of QA most would agree was likely to make Boeing planes less safe.

Yet no lawyer raised an objection. They lawyers also successfully argued that FAA testing was not needed and Boeing can and should be trusted to signoff internally.

There are lots of ways to justify.