Nothing new, sadly
While I was attending college in the Boston area back in the mid-90s, one police agency or another conducted a dynamic entry onto a residence that "best intel" said was the home of a large drug dealer. The "intel" came from a low level user who was (if I recall, likely) pressured into giving up the name and address of his dealer lest he face heavier charges. The entry was conducted only to find the sole occupant was an aged, retired minister with no evidence of any connection to the drug trade.
He didn't get a chance to resist. No he wasn't shot. But being yanked out of bed and thrown to the floor and handcuffed with a boot on his back in the middle of the night was sufficient for a heart attack to kill him just as dead as any bullet could have. Less blood to clean up I guess.
It was that incident that helped persuade me to adopt Libertarian views on recreational drugs.
Even as I've dropped those views in favor of certain restrictions on recreational drug use, I remain firmly opposed to dynamic/forced entry in most every case other than innocent persons being held hostage and an immediate need to effect a rescue effort to save their lives. As an analogy, I can (and do) support residential and school zone speed limits even as I would oppose using tire spikes or air-to-surface missiles to enforce such limits.
In the rare cases where forced/dynamic entry is warranted, "best intel" should be trained observers having personally seen the suspect go into the building and able to swear he hasn't left by any reasonable means.
Charles