Should we say that no building is really locked, since the fire department is alway able to force entry?

We are not talking about human habitats that are supposed to be transitable by design. We are talking about lockers within this habitat, that remain secure even if the house is burning, because you don't want thieves who arrive before the firedepartment to have access to your guns. It's a civil obligation.

"really locked" is using a wholy misused modifier. Neither are we talking about royal priviliges, nor the distinction to virtualized fantasy. The necessary capability of encryptian is effectivity. The effectivity of regular locks is indeed a matter of concern in the security industry to begin with, as lock picking sessions at Defcon make clear. But, if the fireman's axe shreds the frontdoor, at least there will be no denying that you have been literally hacked.

Scale and viability. Your fire department can't break force entry without notifying others in the area or do it to every building in the city.

Now digitally, that's not true. You can keep collecting data without anyone knowing at an unprecedented scale.

They think it is.

Well, if everything is working as planned - it is encrypted in a way, that the economy and the people are protected against criminals, but everything is still in control of the government. That is the plan. And it makes sense, from their point of view. But their point of view usually comes from law schools and not technical universities.

You might be confusing hashed with encrypted.