I have posted more than a few articles by Jim Hoft, and respect his work. But calling those up-rated Humvees “tanks” is an exaggeration that distracts from what is odd. Since WW1, when tanks were first used (IIRC), tanks have had three fundamental characteristics:
Armor; many/most (all?) modern tanks also have air supply filtration to protect occupants from chemical and biological weapons;
Crawler tracks (like a Caterpillar tractor);
A heavy main gun (and often .30- and/or .50-caliber automatic weapons for close fighting and vehicle self-defense).
And a tank also imposed one limitation on its crew - sometimes deadly - limited ingress and egress.
The vehicles pictured in Hoft’s article have wheels (probably with run-flat tires) rather than treads. The vehicles pictured have no heavy main gun, and no medium or light automatic weapons are visible. And at least one pic shows the passenger area has open gratings, which means passengers are not protected from tear gas or “Molotov cocktails”. OTOH, one of the pix shows the rear of the vehicle, which clearly has a relatively large entrance/exit. This vehicle is not a tank, “light”, “heavy” or whatever. It’s a light armored personnel carrier with incomplete protection for the personnel.
"Tank" has a very clear meaning, and in this context, a very emotive one. And that meaning, when applied to these vehicles, is 70%-80% wrong. This vehicle isn’t going to be using its main gun to blow ginormous holes in somebody’s house or place of business. It doesn’t have a main gun. This vehicle isn’t going to be mowing down people Tiananmen-Square-style. It doesn’t have crawler tracks.
So, what can it do? It can carry and, to some degree, protect, people and their gear. A bread-truck-style panel van or a box truck can carry people and gear, and for shear number of people and amount of gear e vehicles this article highlights are inferior to bread trucks and box trucks. These vehicles are best suited to one main purpose: deploying key personnel into dangerous situations such as riots and small arms firefights.
My guess is that these vehicles are battle-worn up-armored Humvees sent home from Iraq and Afghanistan that were declared not worth repairing and surplus. They might have become scrap metal (and maybe some did). The company that refurbished these 2700+ got them relatively cheap, did the refit, and was able to sell them relatively (for their capability) cheap. And DHS bought them (possibly to be distributed to local law enforcement). All that said, this is a really large number of special-use vehicles. How many Watts-style riots happen every year? How many Waco-style stand-offs happen every year?
These vehicles do have some potential for abuse, but calling them “tanks” ridiculously exaggerates their abuse potential and creates false impressions!