Yes, the role of the government is to serve and protect it's citizens,
Which is also unrealistic unless they control and restrict their citizens. Much like how a parent would control and restrict their child/ren to their viewpoint so as to keep an eye on them.
Freedom is the unknown, and we fear what we don't understand. The risk and uncertainty's in the unknown. Freedom
is risk and uncertainty. Safety's in the certain, known, and unrisky.
And when we expects governments to make us happy (ask yourself, if government did everything you wanted right, how would you feel?), we place the responsibilities of freedom and safety on them. And externalised, freedom and safety are contradictions.
This is why when the NSA-spying scandal broke out, Obama said that we can't have complete freedom and complete safety. Trades have to be made. And he asked for an open discussion about this, too.
If we expect people and/or institutions to give us freedom
and safety, then odds are it's because we believe we're incapable of giving freedom and safety to ourselves. Otherwise, we wouldn't need government to do and give us things we want. Government can aid us, but if we perceive it as a crutch (especially when it comes to the core principles we believe government should adhere to), then we're projecting.
And blaming.
And we
all do it. "Government should/n't be doing this! Government should/n't be doing that! This is what government should/n't be!".