I think it is a bit of a culture thing which is a difference between UK and USA helicopter flying period. A few years ago, I spent a very useful period of a month or two flying a JetRanger over LA for a radio traffic patrol. I flew with an experienced pilot who did all the radio reports and left me to do the flying. We flew over massive congested areas at low level way below nearby skyscrapers. When we discussed what to do in the event of an engine failure, I was told to pick a parking lot, or if you had to land on a freeway, land with the traffic direction! If I flew once like that in the UK, I would have lost my licence and never got it back, as well as probably having gone to jail.
The precious way that we do things in the UK almostt always involves the expenditure of more money and less flying. I think if we were to compare the area covered by a UK and US police helicopter, we would find that there were many more US helicopters per unit area.
With the likely loss of the only London heliport, and the NIMBY view of noise, it won't be long before we all get banned from flying over London totally.
The US seems to lead the way in terms of legal liability - yet somehow it has accepted the use of S/E police heles - can anyone explain this apparent contradiction?
I am not sure that TC is right about the sensitivity of the UK to a police helicopter crash in a built-up area. I was sure that we would have all sorts of repercussions following the S Wales crash (mentioned above), but in fact it past almost without comment.