WA Radio Scanner Users' Group

Police want secret speed cameras

Exclusive: Joe Spagnolo

September 02, 2006 04:00pm
Article from: The Sunday Times

MOTORISTS will no longer be told the location of the state's 17 mobile Multanova speed cameras under a controversial new proposal by police and the WA Road Safety Council.
Assistant Traffic Commissioner John McRoberts said yesterday that police had no choice but to look at tough new measures in the wake of alarming road-toll figures that showed 128 West Australians died on WA roads this year -- 22 more than at this time in 2005.

Please see http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0 ... 48,00.html
for the rest of this news item.

Nice cheap and easy option to try and save lives BUT will it be affective? I am not convinced. I will be keeping a close eye on how this progresses in regards to saving lives.

17 Speed cameras? Is that some kind of joke?

In my opinion their should be 50+ speed cameras in Perth metro area alone, make the idiots who think it's ok to speed everywhere realise that it's really not ok to speed.

Put them on every street corner.

...

kellie wrote:The speed camera's aren't cheap, then there's the operators salary and the cost of the vehicle used to transport the camera. It's expensive.

The revenue from each camera outweighs these costs by far

dave wrote:
The revenue from each camera outweighs these costs by far

Bloody oath they do!

I voted no as people are still going to speed wether they no of the locations or not.

I believe they should buy a couple more booze buses and try and decrease the number of deaths resulting in drink driving, but i can only presume that the costs of the buses and the salaries etc outway the revenue they make from drink drivers.

in economics terms
marginal costs>marginal benifits

I knew economics would come in handy for something.

I've also voted "no" because I don't think that the camera location information has any direct relationship to the road toll.

However I've always thought that publishing the locations of the cameras was a silly idea to begin with so I'm reasonably pleased with the proposal to stop this.

However in an "ideal" world, I'd like to see more police on the roads intstead of more cameras. I know it'd cost us, the taxpayer, more money but I'd be in favour of it anyway...

Zebedee wrote:I've also voted "no" because I don't think that the camera location information has any direct relationship to the road toll.

However I've always thought that publishing the locations of the cameras was a silly idea to begin with so I'm reasonably pleased with the proposal to stop this.

I agree, knowing the location, I doubt will effect the road toll, and I have never understood why police have published the location.

Though, if I remember correctly, late last year police done a trial of not publishing locations and during that period less people were clocked speeding.....don't know if there is a reason this happened, or coincidental