If AR-15 is 'weapon of war,' cop bearing it is a 'soldier' for 3rd Amendment purposes

Kurt Hofmann has an excellent point.

Besides, none of the forcible citizen disarmament advocates object to the police being armed with so-called "assault weapons" (although in that context, they might call them "patrol rifles," or "personal defense weapons"), which we are told are "weapons of war, that belong on the battlefield, not on our streets," and are thus not suitable for civilian ownership. Does that not make the police who are issued them soldiers?

In the end, whether the courts buy the Third Amendment argument or not, it is past time for all 50 states to follow Indiana's example, and make that kind of unforgivable thuggery lethally dangerous to the perpetrators (as it is to the victims).