Comments by "Papa’s pronator" (@Papaspronator) on "Hampton Law" channel.

@BNails it would prevent a possible armed suspect from being able to monitor officer movement and location. If you can’t see how that endangers officers then I don’t know what else to tell you.
5
It’s for officer safety. Kinda common sense that it is not safe for a possible suspect who could be armed to have live visual feed on officers.
4
@ I never said in all scenarios cops should block or disable cameras, but in certain instances say they are going to do a search warrant or responding to a house where the resident has been violent to the cops in the past and has a violent history and is likely armed then I have no issue with a cop covering the camera. They should have a reason though. It would be strange to do it on random calls where they don’t believe the homeowner is a threat.
4
@ well if you aren’t planning on ambushing the cops then that is totally fine. But there are people out there unfortunately who might try to do that especially on a search warrant or something so I’m glad they do for their safety. Obviously it isn’t that you don’t understand why they do, as you said clearly said you just don’t care for their safety.
3
@ that’s not how it works. You have rights but there are certain scenarios that cops have the right to override those for officer safety. It’s just the way it is. The cops have a right to be safe within reason. That is the law.
2
@jakemccoy officer safety. If they have live feed of exactly where an officer is and they choose to them harm it puts them in danger. I’m not saying an individual officer couldn’t possibly have some bad intention but Officer safety could be a valid reason the way I see it.
1
It’s an officer safety issue to have someone in the house watching them on live feed in my opinion. I can totally understand why they would be concerned about an ambush. Especially if they are there serving a warrant or something.
1