That may be true if it's a real "Special Weapons And Tactics" team. On the other hand, if it's a "Swat Wannabee And Thug" team, resistance may sometimes enhance one's chance of survival. For example, after Ryan Frederick shot an AR-15 wielding robber who was with a team battering their way through his front door, the robbers realized they should start acting like cops and identify themselves as such (previously they had, by their own admission, deliberately parked all marked police vehicles out of sight of Mr. Frederick's house, and made a verbal "announcement" that was so feeble that some team members, who were listening for it as a cue to invade the garage, didn't hear it). Once the police identified themselves, Mr. Frederick made clear that he would cooperate with lawful police action and he was taken into custody. Had he not shot the robbers, though, it seems likely that one of the robbers with an AR-15 might have shot him on sight.
(BTW, I think Mr. Frederick's lawyer decided to punt for a 'manslaughter' conviction, arguing that Mr. Frederick really had no way of knowing who he was shooting at. I would have thought a better argument would have been that while Mr. Frederick didn't know the precise identity of the people breaking into his home, he had an objectively reasonable beliefs, which were also factually correct, that (1) his home was being broken into, loudly, by people who knew he was home; (2) such conduct is very rare by invaders who do not intend to subdue the occupants of the dwelling they're invading; (3) the invaders did intend to subdue him or worse, and the only way to prevent that would be to shoot them before they could enter more completely; (4) the invaders were not acting like police officers who were reasonably serving a warrant [note that "unreasonable" warrant service is, by 4th Amendment definition, illegitimate].
Your example, was it an incident with actual law enforcement? I’m guessing yes, but I don’t know that I have all of the facts to make that assessment.
My examples are specific to actual law enforcement officers, not “wannabe” cops (i.e. community security or criminals in fake uniforms). Your chances of survival in an incident involving actual trained cops or, worst case, military-trained units, are pretty slim, esp. if you open fire on them.
I have dogs who are diligent at barking at the smallest of noises, and I would unload a magazine of shot shells at an intruder who shot any of them, regardless of the verity of their break-in.
Cops should have to think really hard before plowing down a door on a search warrant, and this law makes that happen. Break down the wrong door, neglect to surveil the home prior to a raid, or knock down the wrong door due to complete incompetence is NOT a permissible reason to ventilate a homeowner or their pets and law enforcement should absolutely be held to account for their behavior, even if they all have matching stories.
The overarching point is that the average citizen does not have recourse against a pack of SWAT meatheads whether by firepower or in a court of law. Law enforcement should not be immune to prosecution from shooting someone’s pet all the way up to an illegal search.
The “Law and Order” mentality of skirting the gray areas of the law makes me sick. Our Founders envisioned “a nation of laws, not men,” and these men get away with murder quite a bit more than I like.