Kalif,
Sorry to wander into the thread so late, but I'd like to comment:
1) The goggles are always better than not. If you want to see into a dark area, goggles allow you to do so. They amplify so greatly it is spooky. They are pilotage devices, which means you use them to fly with directly, as opposed to panel mounted FLIR, which is not a pilotage device. You can't control your vehicle directly while staring at the screen, it is a prescription for disaster. With goggles, you can fly using them directly, thus the term pilotage device.
2) Why do goggle operations seem more dangerous? Because the military pilots use them to fly low altitude, close to obstructions and dangerous profiles mean more risk. If regular police profiles are flown with goggles, they will be far safer than without goggles, and far safer than military NOE operations with goggles.
3) Why did the FAA approval not allow goggles for approach? Because the FAA did not know how to approve them, and anyone with signature authority hid in the bushes while the Advisory Circular was being passed around. Simply said, in FAA the world, one must have criteria to meet to make an approval, and since no goggle criteria exist, it took years to approve them for flight far away from objects.
4) The goggles help everything at night, because they let you see more. Terrain and obstructons, weather avoidance, pilotage navigation are all made better, and they also let you see the areas you are patroling, so you do a better job too.
5) There should be no debate, goggles are a tool that makes current contour altitude operations safer. They will measurebly improve effectiveness of crews at night, and if the same altitudes are flown, they will always improve safety. Given the choce of goggles or panel mounted FLIR, I would always choose goggles. I would like both, of course!