I can understand this in the specific context of Russia, but I honestly don't understand this as a general principle. Allowing the police to convince a judge t

I can understand this in the specific context of Russia, but I honestly don't understand this as a general principle. Allowing the police to convince a judge to issue a warrant for information on a few ProtonMail users doesn't expose 99.9% of other ProtonMail users to anything. Why would a warrant to kick somebody's door down be okay while a warrant for this is not? Are you opposed to all types of police warrants? There is a balance between privacy and catching bad guys, but I often get the sense that much of this community believes the police should never be able to invade somebody's privacy even if they have evidence that person committed a crime. That doesn't seem like a sensible balance to me, and it's an extreme position to take. Am I misunderstanding?