IMO, it's not the uniforms. It's doing stuff like:
Performs aerial reconnaissance for homeland security.
Assists federal law enforcement agencies in the war on drugs.
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/CAP_Fact_Sheet_09_09_B1C2398575B72.pdf
and...
Boise police coordinated a multi law enforcement agency “kegger patrol” Saturday night where officers broke up about half a dozen parties in the desert and gave out 67 tickets for consumption of alcohol by minors.
Boise police have been coordinating the multi-agency “kegger patrol” for graduation weekend for the past three years but this was the first time they were able to use the Civil Air Patrol to help out, Officer Jermain Galloway said Monday.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/06/07/1221636/boise-police-use-planes-to-locate.html
All of those missions are volunteer, just like all the rest, and they don't detract or change the fact that CAP is a life-saving or human service organization at all, since both missions can be accomplished with the same aircraft, so your logic is flawed.
One should also point out that whenever law enforcement is involved, a law enforcement official must be on board to look out the window, and see whatever it is that they want to see. It's not legal for us to do any "surveillance", really. It's also not allowed for them to just call up and jump aboard any time they wish -- any non-member flying in the aircraft triggers a call to a National Operations Center, and a pile of paperwork. The only time I've ever seen that bypassed is if someone's life was threatened, and even then, the notification wheels were turning, it was just time-sensitive to get a Sheriff up so he could see the location of a person needing rescue.
Law enforcement must follow strict rules about "surveillance" of Citizens per regular-ol' U.S. law, as well. The articles make it sound as if we're cracking out the night-vision scopes and watching people. We're not even allowed to use the word "surveillance" during briefings and de-briefings because we're not law-enforcement. Most of the time the served agencies are looking at things, not people, from what I hear.
"Reconnaissance" would be a better choice.
They government isn't exactly going to jump out of a red-white-and-blue Cessna 182 owned by a non-profit Corporation, NOT the government, by the way... with their weapons slung under their arms, flying under parachute canopies, under dark of night, and go in guns-a-blazing.
(Although it does sound kinda funny, "Team America", the movie, style. LOL!)
Meanwhile, by way of more information on those missions -- Members have to be members for a significant amount of time (2 years minimum) to even volunteer for those style missions, and no one is ever required to fly them, or have some problem with those roles, they don't have to participate.
Additionally on the Boise thing -- I can't speak for Idaho, but some CAP Wings are "dual-hatted", and funded by National for the SAR and National functions, and funded by their State for State functions.
Colorado is this way. A Colorado Sheriff or Fire Chief can request assistance, and CAP operates not as a National organization, but under the Colorado Department of Veteran's Affairs.
If you think it's hard to figure that out from outside, imagine the paperwork.
Often when National "runs out of money" for certain things, the State leadership decides to pay for those functions. SAR for lost hikers and mountaineers being a good example. National CAP flies only inland SAR missions triggered by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. State-triggered search missions, are not funded by National.
In fact, in Colorado, much of the maintenance of the aircraft is handled by the State. It's one of those rare, efficient, instances where resources can be operated by both a National non-profit, or State government.
Aircraft and aircrews are even under different liability, insurance, and all sorts of changes happen depending on the type of mission and who's paying for it.
And Members are ALWAYS able to turn down any mission type they don't want to fly.
The "job" is always just to provide a relatively inexpensive transportation to get folks aloft who need to go aloft. That's it. Savings are significant over flying say, a Bell JetRanger or a Chinook, or even many other larger fixed-wing aircraft available for the duties. When it's SAR activity, more eyes is usually better, and the Chinooks and Guard helos know they can work with our chain of command to coordinate search activity. Often the Incident Commander will assign the helos to high-probability areas first, and scatter the Cessnas around in nearby search grids. That gives the best shot for a "direct rescue", as someone pointed out.
So, in general, government agencies never play well together and always want their own toys and own budgets, so no matter how convenient you make offering them a ride in the back of a 182, they eventually buy their own and waste taxpayer dollars. I suspect CAP's role in these law-enforcement things will fade over time.
Hawaii Wing, does Tsunami patrols, with high powered warning speakers and amplifiers with recorded warning messages and also watches for the wave heading ashore, as an example of how really flexible the overall mission roles are. We have no such training here.
Lately these law-enforcement style missions are virtually non-existent or very low tempo, while in most areas the real prep-work these days really is for disaster support. Learning aerial photography skills to be able to show if a bridge is washed out, or a dam has broken and how much damage, is a critical skill defined after things like Katrina, that CAP can fill.
Communications, is also a common role. It doesn't take much money to keep a radio system aloft for ground communications in a disaster area in a C-182, and it can stay aloft quite a while until something bigger, and more expensive to fly, can arrive. (Often a C-130.) During Katrina, I have heard rumors that a number of CAP aircraft were high overhead just helping log in-bound and out-bound times on other aircraft to keep the grids "safe" for the myriad of aircraft in and out. A mini ATC function, so to speak. I believe they also flew supplies of various sorts all over the place down there, as needed.
Anyway, my point stands. CAP is just as much a service to fellow humans as any other service organization. Back in 1942 I suppose "we" dropped some bombs on some German submarines, but back then that was "humanitarian" also, keeping the folks living near the coasts alive.
Want some real "Flying for Good" just talk to an Air Force C-5 Galaxy crew who show up bringing in supplies in a disaster area. Their contribution, even if they're paid to do it, can't be lessened. CAP doing similar things as a multi-funded 501(c)3 non-profit Corporation utilizing volunteers who pay dues to do it, but have the aircraft purchased for their use by Congress, seems even more "humanitarian".
Other than the voluntary law-enforcement missions, CAP is probably the largest, most standardized, and most active aviation humanitarian non-profit in the country. If you count free airplane rides to kids as "humanitarian", Young Eagles is bigger.
