A defacto refutation of the 3rd amendment, iff’n you take “police” to be a member of the army against the “War On Drugs,” as a police officer may enter an apartment and take up residence w/o paying.
The incredibly stupid War on Drugs has turned too much of the police forces in the US and internationally into the very kind of “standing army” — a militarized civil police force — the Founders despised.
Too be sure the founders rejected the concept of a professional standing army for a number of reasons (1) the tendency of a nation’s regent with such an army to use it prematurely and recklessly instead of pursuing equanimity and peace (2) such military expeditions and wars tended toward ruinous expense to the nation, but the last reason was closet to home with them, and probably the strongest reason at the time the Declaration was written. And that is (3) the use of the standing army to enforce abhorrent laws, seizures and taxes upon the citizens.
By the time the Constitution was ratified, that ideal of fierce rejection of a professional standing military had tempered, abated. It was clear that such a standing professional military was needed to quell major civil strive (tax rebellions), internal civil attacks of one state’s militia against another (the Wyoming Valley War), to protect and hold the frontier against foreign and Indian excursions and raids, and to protect the naval trade.
Still, the Founders would not have tolerated today’s negations of the natural rights of property and transit — a man’s home is his castle, and free men may travel freely unmolested by authorities when in that travel is made in good order — in ways that do not harm others or disturb the peace.