That is a very interesting statement

"We're pretending we're having a debate about gun control," Mollie said, "but we're really having a debate about the nature of evil and whether a big enough government can contain it."
I think that's, if not 'it', then a very big part of it.  Because a lot of people somehow think that if the .gov has enough control, then such bad things won't happen anymore.  They ignore history, because "It will work THIS time."

No, it won't.  Because it never has.  All you'd wind up with is a government with control over everything, smashing your liberties, and the bad guys still doing bad-guy stuff.  Except now you won't be able to fight them because you gave up the means in the name of- control?  Pretending you're doing good?  Pretending the bad people won't be bad anymore?

You also wind up with people like that hypocritical, corrupt bastard Charles Rangel in control of your life.
“Law-abiding citizens just shouldn't have to carry a gun,” Rangel added. “You're not gonna push me in that direction.”

But when the Daily Caller reminded Rangel that he and other members of Congress are protected by armed U.S. Capitol Police, he revealed his true feelings on the subject.

“Well, that's a little different. I think we deserve — I think we need to be protected down here,” the Democrat admitted.
'WE need to be protected'.  Because politicians are more deserving of protection than the commoners.  Because having someone else carry a gun for you is somehow SO much better than carrying one yourself.

Also, note the wording:  Law-abiding citizens just shouldn't have to carry a gun.  It's not a matter of 'have to', it's a matter of they don't get a choice because clowns like Rangel won't let them.  Because "The police will protect you(but I don't actually believe that, which is why I get special protection)."

Bastards and control freaks.  You actually WANT them controlling your life?  Then you're a fool.