Not that I’m taking a position on things either way really. The likes of apple should be able to do what they please — just not be surprised when they find the government installing the backdoors themselves.
They're just in a different position... In the DOJ, encryption gets in the way of their job--catching criminals... while the penalties for a backdoor fall on others (those responsible for the data). There's no downside to them personally (and very little for the DOJ itself) for getting a backdoor.
The opposite is true for those not in the DOJ... the protection for our data is compromised.. and in exchange, the DOJ is able to prosecute some criminal we've never known, met, or had any contact with.
To those in the DOJ who deal with criminals everyday, their ability to prosecute criminals is of the upmost importance to them personally... and for the rest of us, unless we're a victim of a crime, there's only downsides to a backdoor.
There is if the people in the DOJ suffer from identity theft and get their bank accounts cleaned out because some nefarious people exploited the backdoors.
People in the DOJ have more options available to them if they choose to try to find or punish an identity thief than the general public.
Also, the direct fear of not being able to do your job because of strong encryption is more focused than a nebulous fear of possible identity theft.
I've known a few cops and they all have stories that are hard to hear and are worse than what you hear on most true crime shows. I assume access to high level intelligence involves endlessly seeing cases where people were caught attempting to purchase weapons grade nuclear materials, endless plots that never happened but are very scary to read about, etc.
That being said, it is bias and it shouldn't be allowed to unilaterally influence politics. Banning strong encryption is both impractical and destructive to our society and economy.