Horrible idea.
Pursuant to Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927 (1995). a US Supreme Court case, law enforcement officers executing a search warrant may not immediately force their way into a residence. Instead, they must first knock and announce their identity and intent. Then, they must wait a reasonable amount of time to allow an occupant to open the door. Only after waiting may the police force entry. This “knock-and-announce rule” is one of the factors a court must consider in its reasonableness test.
Police may only disregard the knock-and-announce rule when it is reasonable to do so. In Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 358 (1997), the Supreme Court held that a no-knock entry is justified when, under the circumstances, knocking and announcing their presence “would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime.”
Many states already have laws stating the issuing magistrate must approve “no-knock” warrants in advance upon a showing of necessity.
Under federal law, According to the United States Department of Justice:
Federal judges and magistrates may lawfully and constitutionally issue “no-knock” warrants where circumstances justify a no-knock entry, and federal law enforcement officers may lawfully apply for such warrants under such circumstances.
My point...there are already checks and balances on the “no-knock” warrant issue. There are many times a “no-knock” is necessary. First and foremost is officer safety. But also, it can help preserve evidence from destruction.
how often are they NOT necessary? Roger Stone's house or Dennis Nathan Cain FBI whistle blower?
That's not working out too good.
From 2010 through 2016, at least 81 civilians and 13 officers died during SWAT raids, including 31 civilians and eight officers during execution of no-knock warrants.