The sparks flew on Fox News Channel Monday night as host Tucker Carlson went toe-to-toe with California Congressman Eric Swalwell (D) on everything from the Russia investigation to gun control. And when it came to the later, Carlson grilled the Congressman on his gun confiscation plan and called him out on the hypocrisy of allowing himself and the rest Congress to be protected with certain guns while the average American citizen would be forced to give theirs up.

Carlson began the fiery segment by quoting a piece Swalwell wrote for the gun-inept USA Today, where he laid out his plan for gun bans. “We should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons. We should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons,” Carlson read.

Swalwell actually tried to suggest what he was calling for didn’t involve the government taking your weapons. He even talked about your weapons like they would be contraband like narcotics:

I'm not calling for a confiscation. What I’m saying is we should invest in a buyback, that we should restrict any weapons that aren't brought back to gun clubs, hunting clubs, shooting ranges. Keep them there where it's safe and not on our streets. And if you are caught, just like if you were caught with drugs or anything else, they have probable cause to go into your home and you had one of these weapons, yeah, you’d be prosecuted.

After going back and forth for a while, and Swalwell saying he expected people to just roll over for his demands if they would become law, Carlson wondered if his guest would apply the same rule to Congress. “Absolutely. But not cops though! I don’t think cops should be outgunned,” Swalwell quickly corrected himself, but he had already shown his true intentions.

“So, your bodyguards should have any kind of guns they want,” Carlson declared. And after spending some time asserting the Capitol Hill police weren’t there to protect members of Congress, Swalwell demanded to know “Why do you need an AR-15 to protect your house?”

“Why shouldn’t my wife have the same firearm at home that your bodyguards use to protect you,” Carlson shot back at one point. Swalwell couldn’t wrap his mind around the question:

SWALWELL: That is a ridiculous argument, Tucker. CARLSON: But, why? SWALWELL: It’s absolutely ridiculous! CARLSON: Why is it ridiculous? Cause you’re more important than me? SWALWELL: No—I—You are trying to confuse the issue here. CARLSON: I’m asking a sincere question. Why should you get to protect yourself with certain guns—

“I'm merely saying that you have better protection than I do. And you are saying that my family doesn't deserve to have a certain species of weapon,” Carlson clarified. “You get to decide what we can protect ourselves with but you are not going to in any way take the ability to protect you away from the Capitol Hill police” Swalwell never had a real legitimate answer to Carlson’s expert questions.

Tucker made a spectacular point about Congressman’s Swalwell’s intentions with his legislation. While the Democrat claimed he had faith Americans would be law-abiding with his law, he didn’t have faith Americans could own their own weapons and use them responsibly.

The relevant portions of the transcript are below, click "expand" to read: