While criminals probably follow the path of least resistance (i.e. they're not going to go out of their way to do things in a harder fashion for no particular reason), they're also extremely motivated and would find some way to do what they do...
Also, saying that a criminal is more likely to use a privacy tool than the average person doesn't say a whole lot about non-criminals who use them.
Also, one of these measures seems to be remarkably "once a criminal always a criminal", therefore probably significantly over-estimates the number of criminals.
Also, again, it's a "mystery sample". We have no clue where it comes from. Also, involves a bad faith actor who is known to use loaded language and to twist terms.
"Have you ever committed a crime?" (Probably with some dodgy definition) type questions are not useful to determine if someone is *currently* committing a crime.
Plus, other inherent weaknesses you get with looking for simple correlations.
I wasn't even going to comment on it but someone seemed so confident in these dodgy numbers, seeing something that isn't even really there. Anyway, if you're ever unfortunate enough to encounter these arguments, then you know their flaws, I guess.
