Not The Onion

16013 readers

1122 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

556

Trump plans to sign an executive order requiring commercial truck drivers to speak English. (www.rawstory.com)

submitted 2 days ago by pelespirit@sh.itjust.works to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

151 comments fedilink hide all child comments

MAGA fans are rejoicing on social media in favor of President Donald Trump's plan to sign an executive order requiring commercial truck drivers to speak English.

Breitbart News reported that Trump would sign the order Monday evening because "President Trump believes that English is a non-negotiable safety requirement for professional drivers." Last month, Trump designated English as "the official language of the United States."

"This is such a big deal! So grateful for this, the roads will be much safer. Like many, I have seen many accidents or near accidents from unqualified drivers," posted @coffeegirlvegas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] coherent_domain@infosec.pub 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The article states: "Republican Representative Harriet Hageman of Wyoming ... [states] a consistent rise in fatal truck crashes since its implementation."

Whereas your statement is "[Requiring truck driver to speak English improves safety] is a fact".

I am not saying what you said is necessarily wrong or the policy is necessarily harmful; but I feel we probably need more proof than "a republican representative said so", to assert a certain statement as "a fact".

BTW, neither you nor the news article provided the relevant data, which IMHO doesn't really inspire confidence in your argument. Let alone all the potiential confounding variable others have mentioned.