There is "self control," there is subtle pressure from peers to do the right thing, and there is pressure from the government in the form of laws and regulations. They all play a part in the decisions most people make.

I'm resorting to Wikipedia here:

Self-control is what I think of as true control, at least in the sense of control applying to people.

The pressures you mention will certainly bear on decisions you make. Choosing behavior unpopular among your peers may cost you friends. Behavior non-congruent with laws may cost you a fine or freedom.

Self-control is objectively good. It allows you save money rather than spending an entire paycheck on pizza and unsweetened iced tea or whatever may be your weakness. Self-control is a positive personally enhancing aspect of people.

OTOH, calling certain laws "gun-control" is both a lie and a myth. Believing that laws are control is a mistake. Laws mostly influence those with self-control.

Attempts to "control" people by passing laws really only provide a guide for those with self-control in the first place. I look at laws as criteria to use when determining if a crime has been committed and deciding on the guilt of an accused. Even more problematic is that by characterizing laws as "control" society expects that control occurs. Once that's accepted, future incidents demonstrating that control is lacking generally serve to support that even more "control" is needed in spite of the fact that no real control exists.

Analogous effects can be seen in declaring "wars" on ideologies or behaviors rather than specific groups or nations. The war on terror is one example. How's that going? Is terror gone yet? That war on drugs, that's completely off the rails. More and more resources are demanded but any victories are fleeting.