BUCK: Welcome back to Clay and Buck.

KATHY HOCHUL: “Shocking. Absolutely shocking that they have taken away our right to have reasonable restrictions. We can have restrictions on speech. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater, but somehow there’s no restrictions allowed on the Second Amendment?” pic.twitter.com/KamGJ7lCt6

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) June 23, 2022

BUCK: This is Buck in solo today. Clay’s out on vacation, and that was the governor of New York, Hochul, whom no one actually voted for or elected or anything like it. She just got appointed when Cuomo was grabbing too many of his subordinates and so he’s out. Not because he forced grandma with covid back into the nursing home and had the most catastrophic results of any nursing home communities in the country. That’s not why the libs got rid of him.

But Hochul, listening to her constitutional analysis or her sense of firearms law, honestly, she should probably just not speak about this at all. I would rather hear Joy Behar make completely inane… At least her statements will be amusingly stupid. Hochul just says really dumb things, has no idea what she’s talking about. The notion that these are “reasonable restrictions”? It’s not reasonable. It’s not reasonable to say, “You’re a law-abiding citizen, you have a Second Amendment right, but I’m not convinced.” If I’m the sheriff for your county, “I’m not convinced you need a gun; so you don’t get one.

“Oh, but somebody else, I think they need one; so they get one.” This is the definition of capricious. This is the definition of the rule of men over the rule of law or instead of the rule of law, and we all know it. Look, all you have to see is at the very top of the — and just for anyone joining us, a huge decision that came down today, 6-3, where the rules around giving someone a carry permit for a firearm in states that require a need to be proven, that is unconstitutional.

Huge implications for New York, California, and a handful of other states. In the dissent by Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, they start… This is the first line of the dissent: “In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms.” What does that have to do with the constitutionality of law-abiding citizens carrying a firearm? Just think about this. Really, their dissent comes down to, “Guns are gross and scary and bad people like to lawfully have them!”

Notice the fascinating separation here. Democrats can always find ways to sympathize with criminals who use guns to hurt people, “Oh, we don’t want to send them to prison for so long!” Just look at the statistics. I’m not making this up. The data proves my point. Look at what they’re doing in New York, look at what they’re doing in Philadelphia, look at what they’re doing in L.A. and San Francisco. Prohibited possessor — previous felons in possession of firearms — dismissed, case dismissed. Go look up the case of Mark Witaschek in Washington, D.C. I remember I interviewed him a long time ago. The guy was a sport hunter — it wasn’t even about self-defense — he had a defunct shotgun shell on him, and the District of Columbia wanted to send him to prison for it. That’s who they want to make an example of.