"Encryption" is quite new, politically. Hasn't been an issue before recently.

"Gun Control" as an issue has been around fro a long, long time. "Save the children" has been run into it before, multiple times, and failed repeatedly.

Did Ukraine need gun control before the invasion? How about now?

The UK did gun control so well they've moved onto "Knife control" and restricting the sale of caustic liquids.

Guns are sold for huge amounts of money. A good percentage of that is used to pay politicians to keep the status quo at all costs.

Encryption, by itself, doesn't make money for everyone. There is no "pro-encryption" PAC with immense war chests and lobbyists.

In the past the US has had bans on certain weapons, I'm not aware of there ever being any encryption bans. Because of this I don't think support of banning encryption is any higher than support for gun control, it's just the flavor of the month.

Encryption doesn't have the fanatical support from the populace that guns do (in countries where those are allowed and are a big part of their culture).

The 2nd Amendment protects gun ownership, and amending the Constitution to change it does not have enough support to happen.

The Texas gunman was only stopped when shot dead by police. If some school principals and teachers were armed, school shooters would be stopped earlier, and some would refrain from attacking, knowing that would be immediately be shot. Mass murderers often choose soft targets, and hardening those targets entails more people carrying guns.