It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Could we see Millitary Helicopters being used in Civillian organisations?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 03:38 PM

Was just thinking, would it be possible for say the LAPD or the NYPD to purchase perhaps 2 apache Gunships each and paint them in Their police livery and use them in "Last case" scenarios, such as partucluary dangerous criminals, or car chases that have gotten out of hand, or even to bust terrorist activites such as destroying or immobilizing truck bombs etc etc?

Just a thought


posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 05:49 PM
Deadly fire is after all deadly fire, what's the difference if you use an AR-15 or a Hellfire? However it will never happen due to political sensitivity and IMO irrational legislation. The Police always call the NG if they need that kind of firepower.

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 06:28 PM
The police often do purchase decommissioned military helicopters. I know that in my town the Police department purchased two Loche’s with FLAIR. However; you will not see the police purchase an armed military helicopter in the near future, as that is not their mission and they are not supposed to appear overtly military, though they are tending to look more military now then ever before.

Additionally, something like an Apache helicopter would require very expensive maintenance, expensive ammunition, and expensive pilot training, well above what most police or sheriff departments allow in their aviation budgets. On top of this, top secret equipment that is often on advanced military aircraft is not going to be allowed to be in the hands of police that the military has no clearance on, nor control over.

[edit on 1/2/2007 by defcon5]

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:01 PM
Pardon me but what is their mission if I my ask? And why does it matter what tools they use to accomplish that mission?

This incident might be of interest.


posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:11 PM
For the same reason that the police USED TO NOT be allowed to carry military style weapons, nor wear fatigues. They have only been slowly allowed to do this in the last 10 years. Prior to that it was considered too military in appearance, and thus not allowed. I know this for a fact since back about 10 years ago, I asked a friend of mine why he could not carry a SPAS shotgun in his sheriff car, and he told me the exact same thing I am telling you.

Their mission is to keep the peace, not start a war, and back then they did not wish to have the appearance of being like the USSR.

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:18 PM
I'd hate to think we are putting the lives of Cops at risk by equipping them with insufficient weaponry to deal with individuals and organization which have no restrictions put on them, all so that they can appear "non military". I'm not saying that's what you're advocating just that IMO it makes no sense.

Originally posted by defcon5
Their mission is to keep the peace, not start a war...

As Regan said, peace through strength...


By the way this topics reminds me of some pictures that I have.

[edit on 2-1-2007 by WestPoint23]

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:32 PM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I'm not saying that's what you're advocating just that IMO it makes no sense.

No what I am saying makes perfect sense, and it must have because it was police policy in Tampa until about 10 years ago.

Around 10 years ago they started allowing officers to wear fatigues for the first time as training fatigues and now on some special ops. You still see the normal run of the mill everyday officer wearing a police uniform. Up until that time they had ugly grayish jumpsuits that they wore for doing training work.

Up until 10 years ago you never saw and officer that had an AR-15 in his trunk unless he was on the SWAT unit, now a lot of them carry them.

Drugs were used as the excuse to slowly allow some military equipment to be used, now its common place due to the excuse of terrorism.

With this in mind though they will never buy something that is as costly as an Apache or a TowCobra, as it would eat up their entire budget just to arm, maintain, and fly the thing for the one time in 20 years that they may get an opportunity to use it. How many police now have an armored entry vehicle, and how many of them are used only for public displays and spend the rest of their time rusting on the unit parking lot?

If the situation required a military response then the governor is supposed to call in the national guard, that is their mission.

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 08:05 PM

Originally posted by defcon5
No what I am saying makes perfect sense, and it must have because it was police policy in Tampa until about 10 years ago.

Umm... Police policy is dictated and set by politicians (
), trust me, if you had asked police officers back then it did not make "perfect sense". Police are now allowed to carry AR-15's and Shotguns in their trunk, an example of why this is needed can be seen in the N. Hollywood Shootout case that occurred, coincidently, about ten years ago.

I took the OP's question on a theoretical basis not one of practicality, I'm not saying that police departments need or can afford to sustain Apache gunship. Just that if theoretically they wanted one, well..., why not?

[edit on 2-1-2007 by WestPoint23]

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:30 PM
I suppose that theorectically they could get one, although it's likely that there would be restrictions on what sort of armament such an Apache could carry. And probably for good reason, I can't say I'd want to see an Apache with an autocannon and hellfire missiles used in an urban area over American soil. So I suppose that it'd be possible to get an Apache, the problem being that it'd be so watered down there'd be no point in getting one.

I'd much rather go with one of the old Huey choppers, those things could haul and have a certain charm that the newer attack helicopters don't have.

Now interestingly enough you should all watch Lord of War. There's this little bit where the main character ships a Russain military helicopter with it's armaments through some loophole where he simply removes the weapons from the helicopter, claims they're different shipments, and says the helicopter is now a search and rescue chopper. Definatley a good movie to see.

[edit on 1/2/2007 by cyberdude78]

posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 01:57 PM
Can you imagine the police flying Apache helos to shoot hellfire missiles at speeding cars. That would be funny. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I agree the line between police and military is getting more blurry by the day.

The role of police is to bring a suspect to court peacefully. Ideally, cops should only use force to defend themselves in case all hell break loose, never as a mean to conduct an arrest.

To the contrary, the mission of military is to destroy its target with the most damage possible by any violent means, and if the currently available weapons are not up to the task, it's their responsibility to invent new ass-kicking technologies helping them kick some ass.

Nowadays we see more and more police in full military gear. What bothers me is that they don't even need all that fancy stuff most of the time, they are just wussies. You see the police SWAT using assault tactics and cocky snipers posted on rooftops simply to catch an angry old dude waving a baseball bat on his porch. This is ridiculous, nothing that they couldn't resolv with a bit of chit chat, but no, they prefer playing the brave guys without the risks of fighting in an actual war, or either they were too fat to join the military.

top topics


log in