This is (hilariously) misguided on two fronts:

1. There is a significantly larger body of jurisprudence dedicated to protecting freedom of expression, versus whatever you think the Second Amendment guarantees you.

2. The right to bear arms does not entitle you to specific weapons. That's why you're not allowed to own a nuclear warhead, and why strong encryption was historically on the ITAR munitions list. Arguing that cryptography is a dangerous weapon (it isn't!) is a terrible idea.