It has been a 2nd Amendment argument for ages because it's tautologically true.
It correctly identifies that the proponents need to justify the cost from substantially all law-abiding citizens following the law against the benefit from only the law-abiding criminals following it.
And say what you will about the benefits of law-abiding citizens carrying firearms, but if you want to seriously dispute the benefits of law-abiding citizens using encryption, try convincing a credit card company to let you accept credit cards on your website without encrypting the traffic.
It correctly identifies that the proponents need to justify the cost from substantially all law-abiding citizens following the law against the benefit from only the law-abiding criminals following it.
And say what you will about the benefits of law-abiding citizens carrying firearms, but if you want to seriously dispute the benefits of law-abiding citizens using encryption, try convincing a credit card company to let you accept credit cards on your website without encrypting the traffic.