This question appears to conflate a number of very different issues, so the simple answer would have to be "No". The more comprehensive answer would be "It depends".
Flagging vs voting
No one with the 3,000 rep required for close-voting should be flagging a question for closure, they should simply VTC. If the question is whether a user with less than 3,000 rep should flag a SWR as POB (don't you just love acronymic answers?), I think the benefit of having a user actively involved in community moderation far outweighs the minor downside of a few questions that might inappropriately be directed to the Review Queue.
If a close flag is inappropriately raised, one possible outcome is that it will expire after an algorithm-determined number of days. I'm not sure what the system interaction is between Review Queue votes to "Leave Open" and the original flag; it would be preferable that if sufficient Leave Open votes are cast and the question is removed from the Review Queue, this also results in the close flag being registered as "declined", because this provides a feedback mechanism for the flagger. [Can anyone confirm if this is the case? If it's not, I'll post something recommending it as a system fix.]
VTC on SWR as POB
No one should be systematically voting all SWRs as POB, as this would suggest that they're not reviewing each question on its merits. The issue is therefore whether a particular SWR could reasonably be viewed as POB. The Help Centre offers the following guidance:
• Opinion-based - discussions focused on diverse opinions are great, but they just don't fit our format well.
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than on facts, references, or specific expertise.
It’s often possible to rewrite opinion-based questions to focus on a more fact-based line of questioning. If you see a way to do this, consider editing the question.
I think the correct approach is to examine the question's actual wording, and in particular assess what kind of response it's seeking. If it's likely to result in a correct, evidence-based answer, then it should not be closed as POB [but it might still warrant closure on other grounds such as being off-topic or too broad or undefined]. However, if the wording is likely to generate opinions rather than solutions, the appropriate action would be either to edit the post to "fix" it, or VTC as POB.
"I'm writing an article about using tools, and I want to capture that feeling you get when you know how to use a tool, e.g. 'When I use a tool properly, I feel _____.' Please tell me what your favourite feeling would be."
I would have no hesitation in closing such a question as POB. Compare that with a slightly reworded example...
"I'm writing an article about using tools, and I want to capture that feeling not just of satisfaction but to a degree smug superiority when someone is adept in the use of a particular tool e.g. 'There's nothing better than the _____ of being expert in one's tool selection and usage.'"
This is clearly seeking a specific word that would be the best fit for the intended usage. Users can vote the question up or down based on its usefulness, but it's a legitimate question and is unlikely to generate primarily opinion-based answers.
Voting vs closing
It's worth making one final point: the idea of requiring five votes to close a question is to ensure that any action is representative of the broader EL&U community's preferences rather than being subject to individual and subjective interpretations or sensitivities. There are plenty of questions that people have voted to close, often for an objectively sensible reason, but which never receive sufficient VTCs and therefore fall off the review queue, the votes having expired. I don't see this as a problem. If we get to the point one day that reasonable SWRs are regularly receiving the five votes required for closure as POB, we should certainly have a further discussion here on Meta. But I don't see any indication that we're heading in that direction.