The FBI and most US law enforcement is notorious for ridiculous overkill and roughing up subjects of search warrants.
For historical context, this trend is due to the pendulum swinging back too far in reaction to the Miami FBI shootout [1], where officers were woefully outgunned.
You can't reasonably both have a pervasively armed populace and law enforcement unprepared to deal with armed resistance from suspects even when the crime of which they are suspected is not itself violent.
> As a “Lawman” crew filmed the raid Monday, deputies serving a search warrant blew out the suspect’s windows and leveled his gate, frightening neighbors. Jesus Llovera, who was convicted last year of attending a cockfight but has no record of owning weapons, was arrested on charges of suspected cockfighting, Phoenix TV station KPHO reported. He was unarmed.
> Steven Seagal, Arizona Sheriff Use Tank to Bust Up Cockfighting for A&E Show (Update)
https://www.thewrap.com/steven-seagal-arizona-sheriff-use-ta...
There was no evidence that the officers making the arrest would be at inordinate risk.
There is no perfect solution, so I think it's better to go with the one that most often protects lives.
I don't have the numbers, but I'd assume wearing body armor and having proper equipment protects more lives than it causes harm (via "freaking out").
What does a SWAT team responding to a heavily-armed bank robbery have to do with raiding the offices of a well-known biotech startup in San Francisco over billing irregularities?
The problem is not that they have equipment, it's that they are incentivized to abuse the entire toolbox for every situation under the sun.
If you can find a single example where raiding a corporate office over financial reasons (or basically anything not involving weapons, violent crime, or a dangerous person) required anything beyond a holstered service weapon then I'll be convinced...
What about raiding a business selling counterfeit goods, like knock-off watches or pharmaceuticals? What about prostitution or sex trafficker rings? It's plausible that given the shady nature of the business, someone may do something stupid.
There are legitimate bases for debate about the details of those precautions, but “there was no problem for them to address” is not one of them.