I largely agree with you as far as rhetoric goes, but I think there are practical details of guns & encryption that matter in practice. First, guns are physical things where encryption is (largely) ideas. Second, the 'protection' offered by the two technologies differs. Guns offer a dis-incentive to mistreat the user, but do not directly restrict behavior when at rest. On the other hand, encryption prevents access even if the user is un-aware, but does not offer any method of 'active' defense (i.e. shooting at an aggressor).
Devil's advocate. Brandishing a firearm i.e. displaying but not drawing it could be considered an 'inactive' defense. Knowing someone owns an iPhone might dissuade one from attempting theft.
> First, guns are physical things where encryption is (largely) ideas.
I don't see what this means for the topic at hand.
> Second, the 'protection' offered by the two technologies differs. Guns offer a dis-incentive to mistreat the user, but do not directly restrict behavior when at rest.
Same here. What's the significance? Would auto-firing guns be better?
On a practical level, it's more difficult to interdict and regulate non-physical things. There is a potential future where 3d printers are good enough and universal enough that guns are knowlege too - but that's not the situation today. How easy a thing is to regulate matters enormously to how actively you want to pursue it.
The difference is that guns require the user to engage others with the gun to be effective. This is how people pull guns on the police who are breaking into their houses and get shot, this is how people hurt themselves while practicing with their guns, etc. Even if everyone has the best of intentions, there is still potential for injury or death. Good intentions are not enough, perfect use of guns is also necessary.
Poor use of encryption, on the other hand, has the opposite effect. Poorly encrypted documents are simply insecure - bad but not injurious. On the other hand, correctly encrypted documents are simply in-accessible. While guns are objects that are fundamentally about affecting other things ("If you do X, I will shoot you"), encryption is fundamentally about affecting the thing that's encrypted.
I suppose I meant that the stakes are lower with encryption. If someone gets encryption and doesn't know how to use it, they simply incorrectly encrypt their stuff. If someone gets a gun and doesn't know how to use it, they may hurt themselves or others. incorrectly encrypted documents may hurt people, but it's not inherent to the encryption.
