554
Trump plans to sign an executive order requiring commercial truck drivers to speak English. (www.rawstory.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
147 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
[–] 8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

I think it would be great if you can list some credible source before asserting a fact.

Also I have a question, why do truck drivers speaking English makes the road more safe? As long as they understand the required knowledge, I don't see the language they speak matters in terms of safety, but that could just be my lack of understanding in this area.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Doesn't the US have a shitton of unstandardized road signs which are just words?

    I feel like you have to have some English proficiency to understand them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If all those signs were in Chinese, it would take a commercial truck driver about a week to memorize the writing for each and learn what it means.
    You don't need to speak the language for that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But the inconsistency is the problem.

    Take a look at the top signs about driving on the shoulder. Who is to say there aren't twenty more variations?

    Maybe a couple of

    "Driving on shoulder mandatory"

    "Trucks on shoulder only"

    "Passing on shoulder permitted"

    "$100 fine for driving on shoulder"

    "Keep shoulder clear"

    "No trucks allowed on shoulder"

    There doesn't seem to be any standard. It's just text.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    none of this calls for an executive order which only tries to legitimize ICE pulling over truck drivers and kidnapping them if they don't have their long form birth certificate on them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Fully agree. Just wanted to provide an argument why having commercial truck drivers have some English proficiency could be beneficial for safety. Requiring a 3 month English course for those unfamiliar with the language as part of getting a CDL would do the trick. But that wouldn't hand money to private prisons, would it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's in the news?

    https://www.newsweek.com/trump-rolling-back-obama-era-english-language-requirement-truck-drivers-2065172

    Quickest example I can come up with:

    "Winter conditions ahead, reduce speed now."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    You know what also happened in 2016? They revised the definition of "large truck" to include 329 more vehicles. By increasing the sample size you're going to see more accidents. Common cause of accidents is fatigue from drivers working too many hours. That gets better if there's less drivers and they have to know English though right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent