I was of the notion that a militia is not a wholly-owned subsidiary of the state, as the police are. And in any case, you seem to be applying the second amendment to an arm of government - which does not compute.
You have two wrong notions:
#1 - Private militias are illegal just about everywhere in the US. The Polity (city/county/State/FedGuv) must have the monopoly on force.
#2 - The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution applies equally to the States, the People, or to other forms of Free Association put in place by the People (such as a city).
Is there actually anything constitutionally wrong with NYPD having air to air and/or surface-to-air capabilities? Don't they get to have their own milita? Home turf prerogative or something?
I don't like police departments for the same reason I don't like all government, but I'm surprised people are so worked up about it.
I like your train of thought... I just don't like NYC having stingers.
But then again, General Gage didn't much care for Colonel Barrett's cannon buried in Concord. Started a bit of a scuffle over the Concord Militia's claim to legitimate ownership of those field pieces. Turned into quite the row by the end of the day.
I'll stew on it.
I still have problems with the notion of NYPD shooting down planes out of "self defense" of the city, and having any pretense that that is acceptable behavior or risk management. Though the issue is entirely theoretical now that we have been told their defensive tactic is helos and .50 rifles.