Leaving aside the detritus which caused the thread to be locked, I think the issues raised on the NYPD Pic thread were these, in no particular order.

1. Is there anything ominous, encouraging, or otherwise meaningful in the practice of having officers on the street in combat helmets carrying long arms? Should this practice continue? Should it become routine?

2. Given that the guy in the photo probably had a good reason for wearing a mask, when if ever should LEOs wear masks on duty. [At a minimum, I vote for "anytime they're likely to be engulfed in flame, nomex masks are OK."]

3. Is it proper for LEOs to possess or use weapons which are as a practical matter denied to citizens of the place they police?

4. On the question of continuing a given law on the books, does the burden of proof concerning its effectiveness lie with proponents of the law or with its opponents?

5. When, if ever, is it proper for a government to require magnetometer or pat-down searches for entry into a public place?

I say it was mostly window dressing for the sheeple.

I think it took more guts to go out and celebrate WITHOUT carrying an assault rifle.

The .gov should be encouraging MORE active participation by the citizens.

Get you fat ass in shape,
learn to shoot.
That's a good starting point..


Oh yeah-- turn off that damn idiot box!!!

I think that the Libertarians and neo-anarchist have little to no need for police in any form.

[I'm IBTL on this one because I know where it will go.]


FLAL1A, I saw a picture in the Financial Times on Friday of a helicopter patrolling the skies over NYC with a MAG-58 door gunner.  I have seen said helicopter from the ground, it's a black colored unmarked Black Hawk helicopter, although I never saw the door gunner.  I think it must be a military chopper because IIRC civilian departments are not permitted to fly Black Hawks.

Does that impact your third question?  Armed machineguns on military helicopters orbiting the metropolitan area?

No, on all counts.



Other than being on fire, LEOs should only wear clothing that protects their identity when/if they may be in a situation where knowledge of their official capacity would compromise an undercover operation.  My question is, why is an UC LEO doing uniformed patrol?



No.



Laws should be tested first against the COTUS.



If a private property owner wants to create a sterile area to conduct business, that is their option.  In a public place, NFW.

Don't blame the officers blame the        (elected officials!!!) AKA policy makers!!!
or better yet blame the none-voters

Think of the money we could save if we gave $100 tax credit to everyone that voted in the USA!!![soapbox]

This brings up another issue.

6. Does all the blame lie on policymakers who make asinine laws, or does some of it also lay on those who willingly carry out their orders?

This was also a topic of heated debate.

3. No leo needs access to anything I cant get without an FFL.

as to SW's 6.  Blame is on both.  



-HS

You forgot that it showed that most people have no clue on how the Constitution works, or how laws are determined to be Constitutional/Unconstitutional or how states for the most part can make and enforce just about any laws they want.

And no I am not an LEO.

About the only thing most agreed on is the NY laws aren't nice.

Most couldn't understand that until things change legally, it's up to NY to get it changed.  It's NY's fault, they gotta fix it or the SCOTUS can.  But until that happens, yah gotta live with it.