The arguments are built on hyperbole. People who are concerned are compared with people burning off their fingerprints and anti-vaxxers. For passwords, it's possible for "any kid anywhere in the world with an internet connection to grab troves of them with ease."
The approach is undeniably dramatic but the primary purpose is to highlight that using biometrics for passwords is beneficial for most people and shouldn't be dismissed.
I personally used a pin code on my second phone because I was fearful of the biometrics chatter but this article convinced me that using the fingerprint scanner is safer in most scenarios than otherwise.
The core of Troy Hunt's argument about the legal difference of biometrics vs a password seems to be that the cops are "going to shoot you (too) and take your phone". Which is dramatic but doesn't really address the issue. Yeah fine sure, if you're a criminal drug dealer and Denzel Washington's crooked narcotics cop character from Training Day rolls up on you and wants your phone, you're either going to give up the phone or you're going to die.
Back in the real world, we saw civil unrest (of varying types) in the past 12 months, but the rule of law is still there. See how the case against Backpage for sex trafficking is being re-run.
