Mix 94.5

What the Police and the State and Federal governments need to do is put a limit on the engine size of the vehicle a "L" and "P" plate driver can drive.

Where motorcyclists are limited to a 250cc motorcycle for some 18 months, there should be a similar limit on the engine size for these drivers.

A maximum non-turbo 2 litre size engine is more than sufficient for these new drivers to cope with.

Currently you have 18 year old "P" platers going and purchasing a high powered Holden Commodore as an example, on the never-never, rapping it around a tree or another innocent road user, creating another yet unnecessary road death.

Wake up the law makers of this land and stop looking at others to blame for a simple solution to an ever increasing problem no-one wants to make an unpopular solution to!!

Posted by di Monday 21 July, 2008 06:46 PM

I cannot believe people moaning about camera's , as far as I am concerned there whereabouts should not be public information.

There also should be more of them , last I checked most motor vehicles had things called speedo's and most roads have signs with numbers on , if you cannot match the numbers then pay for being stupid / blind / ignorant , but stop whingeing about it.

Posted by Jamie Tuesday 15 July, 2008 06:11 PM

the best to stop speeding drivers is to have signs posted everywhere stating (you are being watched) and have speed cameras out in plain view instead of hiding them.If you hide them people ain't gonna drive the speed limit,if there in plain view they will.

Posted by malcolm K Monday 14 July, 2008 06:10 PM

when i was 40 years younger, the speed limit was 35mph and most of the traffic drove at 40mph, when their was a policeman around they slowed down. when the metric system was introduced and moved to 60kph most traffic drove between 60 and 70kph depending where they are.
more policemen would be desirable to slow down the speeders. multinovers may be revenue raising but the speeders must be prepared to pay for their wrong doing.
when the drivers get their drivers licences they have to be aware of their responsabilities to other road users and make multinovers redundant by not speeding.

Posted by rl Sunday 13 July, 2008 09:22 PM

Hey
I have got a great idea!
Why didn't we think of this before?
We could all send the coffers broke. Why don't we all take special care and not speed for a whole year. Imagine, no revenue from speed cameras for a whole year. That will get the bean counters rethinking policy.
(oh and yes, I am taking a swipe at those who say cameras are revenue raising)
Martin W

Posted by Martin W Saturday 12 July, 2008 07:07 PM

It's time we all faced a hard fact - people are going to die on our roads, there will never be a zero road toll. It will not happen because we are, after all, just human. We drive unroadworthy cars, we drink and drive, we drive with too little sleep, after arguments, when we are unwell, etc etc etc. The best we can hope for is not to kill ourselves, and more importantly, not to kill anyone else. So drop the attitude, can the arrogance, and just drive safely and with consideration for others. Just because we speed doesn't make us unsafe drivers!

Posted by Denise Friday 11 July, 2008 07:24 AM

the best safety device ever put in a car is the rear view mirror---- with a police car in it.speed cameras are pure revenue raising

Posted by macca58 Friday 11 July, 2008 07:10 AM

Multinovas are far less effective than Police presence. Watch how many people speed when there is a police car or bike around them? The road toll could be drastically cut if car drivers were made to have the same rules applied to them as motorcyclists; limit the power of their vehicle for the duration of P plates; and undertake an additional driving test before given an "open" license. Right now, I could get my license and go and puchase any car; WRX, Nissan GTS, any V8 etc; how much experience do I have in driving at this point? Not very much... just a thought.....

Posted by Ralph Wednesday 9 July, 2008 03:39 PM

hide them ! aren't they already hidden ? if you want to slow traffic put them where they can be seen . just another fund rasing exercise so they can have a $1400 pay rise . i think my bills went up $1400 . what happened to by the people for the people.

Posted by john s Wednesday 9 July, 2008 03:24 PM

SPEED DOES NOT KILL!!!! Its the sudden stop that kills you.

Posted by adrian Wednesday 9 July, 2008 11:35 AM

if speed cameras slow traffic down how come more people are caught for speeding every year. Maltanovas dont work!!!!!!

Posted by adrian Wednesday 9 July, 2008 11:29 AM

THANKYOU GWEN!!!!

Finally, someone gets it... Perth has to have the most selfish drivers in the world. how many times I have encountered so many people on the drive down south, doing 95 in a 100 zone, yet speed up to 115 - 120 when I try to overtake them. Unbelievable...

And merging.. MY GOD? There is a simple reason why every morning on the Mitchell Freeway, traffic eases at Scb Beach road. There is amerge point there that ends... Perth people can not merge!!!

Like a zip... merging is like the teeth on a zip

Posted by Johnno Wednesday 9 July, 2008 10:37 AM

Lack of concentration when driving is the major cause of traffic accidents. All european countries drive at speeds far in excess of those in Western Australia very safely because they have to be far more alert at higher speeds. Surely it is safer to drive at 110kms per hour on the freeway where the current speed limit is 100 rather than on single lane country roads where the speed limit is 110? WAKE UP Western Australia and concentrate on your driving, pull over to the left when you have overtaken and be aware that the traffic lights are going to turn GREEN and that means GO!

Posted by Gwen Kerrison Wednesday 9 July, 2008 09:59 AM

To start with lets dump the biggest Red Herring ever, the police don't get a cent from speed cameras and if the govt was revenue raising it would vigerously collect traffic fines.
Speed is one of the major contributers to death and serious injury on our roads. Surprise speed cameras are effective parts of the road safety fight. Why does the lead foot lobby have so much say?

Posted by Rob Briggs Tuesday 8 July, 2008 05:49 PM

Speeding is an arrogance. Nothing more. I've sped but hey, that's ok, I'm a good driver, it won't happen to me. And THAT it dangerous. Arrogance underlined. Revenue, will not curb speeding. Every single person obtaining their licence should be made to have a hard, first hand look at what marks our roads red - every single day. The blood of a loved one or worse, someone who could have been.

Posted by fruits Monday 7 July, 2008 06:46 PM

I found that my 2 sons driving habits improved tremendously when I was recouperating from neurosurgery at "Shenton Park Rehabilitation Hospital" after they saw for themselves the results of some car /motorbike accident victims. I must mention my driving improved as well.

My remedy is to make every person picked up for dangerous driving etc should by law have to spend a day or two at "The Rehab." and either help or chat to some of the victims/patients there.

I am certain that that is the remedy we are looking for.

Posted by Claire Monday 7 July, 2008 12:03 PM

If we didn't have revenue raisers such as speed cameras our taxes would be higher, so to all those people out there who choose to break the law, thanks your keeping my taxes down.

Posted by Phil Monday 7 July, 2008 07:02 AM

I reckon you're all loopy - all you people who think m'nova's are life savers. Get a grip you clowns

Posted by Bazza Saturday 5 July, 2008 11:20 AM

it wouldnt matter what speed limit the signs say, some people are always going to go faster. Its like a game of chance I think, may I will get caught maybe not. But when they do get caught, they complain about revenue raising. If you dont want to contribute to the so called revenue raising, dont speed. Quite simple really!

Posted by Abby Saturday 5 July, 2008 10:06 AM

If i was the police comitioner i would come out in the open and admit that multanovas are revenue raisers. the police need all the revenue they can get. they sure as hell should be paid a lot more. If they said they are there to collect money to pay for police operations, solving crime and catching criminals, i think people would have a lot more respect for them, and you would be able to tell who the criminals are they would be the ones doing the speed limit.

Posted by adrian Friday 4 July, 2008 11:03 AM

I have to admit that I am a habitual speeder - 10-15km over the limit is normal for me and about the only time I stick to the limit is when near a school. That said, the cameras should be hidden - there is no deterrant value in knowing where a camera is, slowing down as you pass it and then speeding up again. The deterrant value comes when you drive to the speed limit ALL the time because behind that bush, that tree, that bus stop could be a camera. But there also needs to be a whole attitude change, starting with better driver training including skid & slide training, (yr 12 is now mandatory why not make road education part of the school curriculem) a rethink of the camera attitude because (and I say this as ex member of camera section) they are used in some respects as tax devices. There also needs to be a rethink of speed limits because it is a joke when the Old Coast Rd with all its horrors is zoned 110 yet we can only do 100 on the freeway.

Posted by Paul Jones Friday 4 July, 2008 05:48 AM

Over the years I've listened to both sides of the revenue raising versus deterent arguement. I have also witnessed the 'advice' signs (which some drivers spot before the radar) being placed sideways, behind trees and down the slopes of hills so that they can't be seen, thereby losing their 'deterent' effect of slowing speeding motorists. Yep, their revenue raisers!

(Best salesmen in the world though! They sell ya a little white slip of paper that you don't even want and ya pay a lot of money for it, whether you want it or not!!!)

I now refer to them as mobile spontaneous random revenue collection stations. I have lost respect, (but not all), for the police traffic section in this regard due to the above actions. They have some serious ground to make up now in my books.

I want to see the hard facts before valuable tax payer money is spent (or raised)!!!

Also, Karl O'Calahan needs to understand something...whilst I totally agree with him in regards to police needing protection under the law from bashings and assualts...the general public don't appreciate being bashed and assaulted either! Everyone needs that protection!

Posted by charles name changed Friday 4 July, 2008 12:06 AM

1.) Speed checking and big boot approach has not worked in the past, doesn't work now, and cannot work in the future, because the principle behind it goes against human nature. Instead of attempting to oppress human nature we should harness it towards better road safety. I have the solution if anyone is interested.

Posted by Janos Paskandy Thursday 3 July, 2008 10:57 AM

Would be great to see the statistics showing if the road toll has in anyway decreased since the introduction of speed cameras. If no, how can we support these devices, and obviously they are pure revenue raisers.

Posted by Bruce Thursday 3 July, 2008 08:54 AM

Multanovas catch those exceeding the speed limit at one point in time. They are unfair as they don't take into consideration any other factors. The speed limit on our streets used to be 60kph and now if we do 55 we are speeding! I don't think so!

Posted by Kaye Ross Thursday 3 July, 2008 08:52 AM

Radars are a voluntary tax, you can choose not to incur the tax by obeying the law

Posted by Usha Patel Wednesday 2 July, 2008 07:18 PM

Speed cameras can and do cause accidents. How many times do people brake suddenly on seeing a camera? How many accidents are caused by this behaviour? I agree that people shouldn't speed, and if they get caught going over the speed limit, then tough they knew they were not doing the right thing. Having spent time in the fire & rescue service, I have seen first hand what damage speeding can do. Unfortuantely we live in a society where a large number of people view speeding, cutting people off, and not letting other cars into their lane, as acceptable. Being courteous on the roads costs nothing, and does save lives.

Posted by Angie Wednesday 2 July, 2008 06:06 PM

Well arrogant Allan and his henchmen have thought of another way to rip us off with multinova's. If all of the fines money went to building better roads and eradicating black spots most people would be happy. But, hey in these times of a boom economy you'd think they would do that anyway!! I've got something simple, if all of the people that are hiding now, come out and send arrogant Allan and his henchman back to the backbenches where they belong at the next elections they may just get the hint; or will they?

Posted by Glenn Watson Wednesday 2 July, 2008 05:51 PM

i,ve read a few comments about multanavas on your web site, and they all seem to be missing the big picture here, it's quite simple really, IF YOU DON'T SPEED YOU WON'T GET YOUR PICTURE TAKEN. see i told you it was that simple, so you see, it dosent matter if there on every corner because if you break the crime, you do the time. speed and alcohol kills, it's a fact, they should try banning alcohol advertising on tv as well, you dont see advertising of ciggarettes on tv anymore, and alcohol is the main ingreedient in these people speeding.

Posted by wayne daniels Wednesday 2 July, 2008 02:54 PM

if multanovas reduced speeding infringments by 50% ,speeding fines would increase by the same amount. Its all about $$$$$

Posted by adrian Wednesday 2 July, 2008 01:57 PM

I find the comments so far mind boggling, it makes me wonder how many demerit points these people have left. People who break the speed limit are breaking the law. Whether its 5 K,s or 100 k,s. when you speed amongst others who want to stick to the limit, you are driving dangerously, probably tail gating, which is illegal and stupid, weaving in and out to create your self the fastest route, abusing people under your breath or vocally, using more than your fare share of fuel which also adds to pollution at a greater rate, increasing the amount of aggression and stress in public, displaying that you are selfish to others around you and have a delusional idea that your cool. Well your not, speeding and your ignorant behaviour substantially contributes to the risk of accident. Therefore should that type of accident be considered an accident?
Yes speeding Fines are revenue, derived from the fines paid by people whom broke the law. Certainally there are other contributing factors to 'real accidents', why don't we as a society make speeding NOT one of them. Accept there is traffic, accept that you are not important enough to speed, accept that if you've got an amazing car that it still has to do the speed limit, stop flashing your lights to warn fellow speeders that the cops are near, and get some peace and calm about the way you drive. After all if we all stopped doing it then lots might change and the government won't get the revenue

Posted by Andrew Whitehead Wednesday 2 July, 2008 01:33 PM

If multanovas are for safety, then why are they always on the freeway and "safe roads and not in the backstreets and school zones???

Answer.....Not enough traffic to justify them being there = won't make enough revenue.

Posted by Ralph Wednesday 2 July, 2008 12:48 PM

You can put a Multinova on every lamp post on every street in each direction but it won't stop accidents from happening. It will probably stop speeding altogether and reduce revenue to nil but accidents will still happen - thats's why there called ACCIDENTS.

Posted by Steve Wednesday 2 July, 2008 12:27 PM

Multanovas serve no purpose in reducing the road toll. Speed alone never kills. There is always a combination of factors when someone dies as a result of a road fatality. Look at any road death report and you will see that speed alone did not cause that person or persons death. This so called you beaut report is just another mindless academic trying to make a name for themselves. The reasons for our road toll have not been seriously looked at, managed or controlled. The so called gurus would have us believe that by slowing down will save lives. This tired argument has been proved wrong time and time again. There is no serious concern about safety on our roads by those who should know best, just a couple of quick fix solutions.

Posted by Mike G Wednesday 2 July, 2008 10:53 AM

Honestly, what don't these people get about human nature. "Out of sight, out of mind". By hiding speed cameras it will cut the road toll by 25%? What an absolute load of crap!

For a start you can't legislate against stupidity and there are a lot of stupid people on the road that will not take any notice of anyone or anything. The first thing thing to do if the state government are serious about saving lives on our roads is to spend the money and get more police on the roads in cars so bright and decked out in bells and whistles you can see them from a kilometre away. Do you see how many people do the wrong thing on the road when they're traveling in sight of a police car? None if they know they're there.

This in concert with Multanovas will make a difference but speed cameras alone? The facts are there. It doesn't work. Let's be honest here, how serious can they be about road safety when they continue to give out drivers licenses to drive V8 utes and high performance cars to young people who couldn't drive out of sight on a dark night and let multiple drink drivers escape real penalties that will save innocent victims on our roads.

Ask the family of Fiona Worts how much the judiciary thought her innocent young life was worth. What was it again? 6 years and out in 4 wasn't it? Until the state government want to get serious about road safety and are willing to put their hands in their pockets and spend OUR money on doing the right thing they should try concentrating on getting a reliable supply of gas into the metro area for a start and legislate to send a message to violent offenders and repeat drunk drivers to get them off the street for a VERY long time so normal law abiding people can go about their lives without fear of being punched in the head and die on a street corner while their attacker gets a slap on the wrist.

I wonder if Jim McGinty or any of his family were injured or worse in that burglary at his home some weeks ago if things may be now looked at differently. The state government and the judiciary needs to send a message and they aren't and while this continues we and the ones that are close to us are the people that will suffer.

Posted by Ian Blackley Wednesday 2 July, 2008 10:44 AM

Multinovas save lives, I DON'T THINK SO. I have never heard of a multinova keeping someone awake behind the wheel. All they do is get revenue from someone who has already committed an offense. Surely the best method would be to prevent the offense, not just catch someone once they have offended. More visable police will certainly slow people down. Even cardboard cutouts have worked in the past.

Posted by O J Wednesday 2 July, 2008 10:39 AM

Hi bunch, whilst driving to work this morning i heard on the 7.30 news about a Beetles interview from 1964 but missed the web address. Could you please direct a die-hard fan. Cheers.

Posted by Simon Locke Wednesday 2 July, 2008 10:31 AM

our cops do a hard job very well i believe there should be more police on the roads,funding for the extra numbers should come from the confiscated proceeds of crime.more police on the roads is more of a deterant to speeders than these cameras..

Posted by peter Wednesday 2 July, 2008 10:10 AM

Having fixed multinovas will allow people to remember where they are... therefore allow them to know more likely where they aren't, making it less likely to get caught... So i personally think it might cause more speeding rather than less because people will feel more confident on where there are and arent speed cameras... John :)

Posted by John Wednesday 2 July, 2008 09:08 AM