While I have issues with the whole accredited investor bar to creating wealth, does it also protect companies from a higher likelihood of their equity ending up

While I have issues with the whole accredited investor bar to creating wealth, does it also protect companies from a higher likelihood of their equity ending up in the hands of a failed investors creditors? Someone making less than $200k/y could still be considered precarious, and suddenly having one of their litigious creditors on your cap table could expose other investors to risk. I'm really against the accredited investor limitation, as it creates the conditions for shady loans, reduces small entrepreneurs access to capital, and causes bubbles in things like real estate and garbage stocks, but the altruistic rationale of the regulation for "protecting small investors," seems insincere and it seems more plausible that it protects an establishment of investors instead.