Funny thing is, this doesn’t hurt criminals at all. If you’re doing serious crime, you bring your own encryption. There are cartels that spend a lot of money rolling their own crypto.
In the UK we have a huge problem with children sending hateful communications online which cause anxiety and distress. As it stands we can only arrest children who are doing this in public but banning encryption should give authorities more power to arrest children who are committing these crimes in private (eg on WhatsApp).
The list really of hate crimes being committed online is endless and these are just the criminals doing this in public:
Well, I just hope you're preaching to the choir about that here. All have to add is that the people deciding these laws also enjoy parliamentary privilege which exempts them from slander and libel charges. Isn't that nice? They can be untouchable while you and I get to have our stripped away.
Is this satire? Between being pro child-arrest, and using the phrase "anxiety and distress", which seems to be rather uncommon, and is the exact same phrasing as your 3rd link, I'm starting to feel like parody is the most likely option.
I find being highly disagreeable often helps makes a point. It's find it can be hard to invoke appropriate emotional outrage with a well reasoned argument.
