Property defense works both ways. Maybe someone lost their Bitcoin, like that guy who was searching a landfill for his hard drive. Quantum could be his only chance to recover. For him "defending his property" means fighting against this BIP. Or maybe Satoshi wants his coins to be a bounty for quantum research.
If devs start deciding whats best for people's coins that is the attack on private property., especially if the justification is keeping the fiat price high by limiting supply (this was the plot in Goldfinger). That is an insane slippery slope. There will always be some justification for freezing coins and if it also helps keep the price up then the incentives are completely broken. Should we freeze Saylor's coins next?
