Your perspective is showing: one could reformulate your post as "Handguns are designed for self-protection. Tor is designed to put internet users above the law.

Your perspective is showing: one could reformulate your post as "Handguns are designed for self-protection. Tor is designed to put internet users above the law." The whole idea of drawing moral distinctions between objects is a canard. Objects (including atomic bombs and function-enhanced H5N1) lack agency, so they are of course morally neutral. This neutrality doesn't preclude our talking about the morally-relevant effects these objects have on society though. It's plausible under the utilitarian calculus that a ban on Tor would be in our collective interest. I personally don't think it is, but the question of Tor's overall utility is legitimate and the answer isn't immediately obvious.