"Sport Shooting Ambassador Award" Winner Antonin Scalia's 2nd Amendment Ruling Does His Gun Pals Proud

Fifteen months after receiving the "Sport Shooting Ambassador Award" from the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities (WFSA), Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has done his part to make sure that, at least in the U.S., the future for his gun industry friends and their lobbying pals is a little bit brighter.

In authoring the opinion overturning Washington, DC's handgun ban, Justice Scalia leaves little doubt as to why he was honored with the Ambassador Award, which offers "public recognition of the social contribution made by some of the many public figures who have a longstanding interest in the shooting sports." The WFSA is an international organization comprised primarily of gunmakers and pro-gun organizations (including the National Rifle Association) from around the world. Scalia was awarded the honor and gave the keynote address during the WFSA's 2007 annual meeting in Nuremberg, Germany, held in conjunction with the Internationale Waffen Ausstellung (IWA), "the world's leading exhibition for hunting and sporting arms." The previous year's winner was Ugo Gussalli Beretta, president of the Italian gun manufacturer Beretta. The award consists of a silver reproduction of a 16th century pistol with powder flask.

According to the April 10, 2007, edition of The New Gun Week, Scalia's keynote address "focused mostly on trends and threats to the international traditions of sport hunting." The cover of the issue features Scalia posing with Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb, a convicted felon who at one time lost the ability to possess guns. (He later regained the ability to own guns through the now-defunded federal "relief from disability" program, a multi-million dollar program that re-armed convicted, often violent, felons, at taxpayer expense. The program was defunded after being exposed by my organization, the Violence Policy Center.) In the background of the picture appears to be pro-gun attorney and National Rifle Association grantee Stephen Halbrook (who also authored the amicus brief signed by members of the U.S. House and Senate in support of overturning the DC ban).

While the WFSA Web site has photos and comments from prior "WFSA Ambassadors," no such honors are offered for Justice Scalia, whose name sits unadorned by a photo or additional information.

Perhaps the WFSA will post today's decision on its Web site in his honor.

Comments

[deminmo]

Isn't the second ammendment also about STATE
militias? And wasn't it because most people lived
in very isolated areas and had to defend their own
property, because there was no one else.
I know what I am about to say is probably trite to most,
but yesterday someone shot two dogs on their own
property. One dog had to be put down because her eye,
tongue and part of her jaw were gone. She lived to
make it to a vet. The other survived.

[deminmo]

There is nothing wrong with gun ownership. The guns
don't fire themselves at kids at schools. Besides, two
people shooting at each other gives both a 50/50 chance.
Course, we'd be in trouble if the deer and other game lobby
the right to own guns.

[deminmo]

Justice Scalia came from the Enterprise Institute, as did
a lot of close advisors to the Bush administration. The
NRA is a strong lobbying group. Go figure.

[The Impartial]

Are these people in the MILITIA ?

[NL207]

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

-- George Mason.

In the view of our Founders, they are most certainly a part of the militia. What you wish to call the 'Militia' is what Our Founders would refer to as a 'Standing Army', something they sought to avoid.

[djkrlsn]

Can you vote, are you able bodied and not in the military--if yes then you are in the militia

[Thirdpower]

The NRA didn't start this lawsuit nor were they associated w/ it until it got to SCOTUS.

[Breakwind]

Josh, you gonna shed a tear in your beer?

[GuyRC]

Tell you what, if you see someone robbing me at gun point please call a cop rather than pulling out your gun. I don't want to die in your cross fire.

[dphilip]

I'll tell you what Guy, How about I just keep walking and let you wait and hope for a trained police officer to come and save you?

[djkrlsn]

Guy--do you still have comets landing in your driveway more often than people break into other people's houses?

[djkrlsn]

Guy--you are more likely to be shot by a criminal than a law abiding citizen

[GuyRC]

I think getting shot by a law-abiding gun owner is a lot more likely than someone breaking into my house while I'm home.

[muffinman2]

Hey Jade. Still crying about being killed in a cross-fire, huh? If it's such a danger, why doesn't it happen where the carrying of firearms is allowed?

[GuyRC]

I'm not Jade.

[Jeffersonian22]

That's a deal, Guy. Tell you what, to let all of us mouth-breathing troglodytes know who you are and to simultaneously display your moral superiority, wear a shirt that says "I am unarmed."

[GuyRC]

I've never seen a mouth-breathing troglodyte, what do you look like?

[hopeless277]

So now we can carry guns into the Supreme Court? No!!! Why the hell not????

[jimpryor99]

LOL, I"m terribly confused. All the Supreme Court did was say "the Constitution is correct as written". End of story. Where were all the whiners when the Supreme Court said that foreign citizens on foreign soil had rights under the dang Constitution? Or when it said that the State of Louisiana isn't smart enough to punish people who violently rape children? NOWHERE! That's where you were. But with this stupid case, that simply confirmed the written word of the Constitution....now you whine. Its pitiful to share the same citizenship with many of you.

[alkamm]

I've owned guns, more or less legally, but I'm no hunter-gatherer, and rarely even fired them. Well meaning friends thought I should have them. No one has anything to fear from me or my children owning or operating guns, I can assure you.

Guns are not primarily for hunting, as many progressives/liberals often fail to understand. They are for protecting property and life that belong to the gun owner. When the LA riots went down after the Rodney King verdict, Korean store owners positioned themselves on top of their grocery stores and insured their right to continue operating by firing semi-automatic rifles at those who would have robbed them blind.

In times of civil disruption, people need tools top protect themselves. As many have noted, the police can not always protect us, and in fact have no legal responsibility to do so. If they see us being robbed and choose to turn away, that is their right, and they cannot be prosecuted for it.

If certain fascist elements in this or any country tries to take over, the right to bear arms will make it well nigh impossible to get away with civic murder. To protect us from the crazy suicidal elements of society by banning guns is simply not going to protect us.

Perhaps the best regulation would be for one's friends and relatives and perhaps a doctor to sign on to gun permits. If several said, "no way," then deny the permit.

[mmogu77]

If fascist elements try to take over, they will probably be in the government--a slight extension of the Bush administration's unitary executive--and they will have tanks, planes and laser guided missiles. Do you really think rifles, shotguns and handguns in the hands of ordinary citizens could stop them? Or do you think the individual's "constitutional" right to bear arms, separate from a militia, includes the right of individuals to own their own tanks, jet bombers, and laser guided missiles?

[Grrr]

A big shout out to the Fascist Five on the big court. You just handed the election to Obama. A reverse decision on this case, that is, a true reading of the constitution which clearly defines the right to bear arms as a collective one in the context of now defunct state militias, whould have only inflamed all the gun nuts. It would have increased donations to the NRA backed 527groups and opened a deluge of pissed-off conservatives who would have held their noses and voted for McShame. It would quickly have eclipsed most other campaign issues.

Now Obama will have 8 years to quietly go about the business of realigning the court. You know all those 5-4s could easily become 4-5s. Thanks boys for taking a bullet for Barrack.

[midnoon]

Neener, Neener, Neener!!! Sour Grapes!

[Grrr]

Dude. You don't get it. In all seriousness this is the best thing that's happened to liberals in the campaign. McLame would have used this issue to bash the Dems into oblivion. Now, it just goes away. Thank you , thank you, thank you gang of 5.

Love , Grrr

[Photofarm]

It would be nice if just 10% of the people that use the word Fascist on this website actually knew what they were talking about. The reason for the 2nd amendment was to give people the right to stop government officials from overrunning private homes.

[jimpryor99]

So the Supreme Court rules that the law of the land, as we've known it since the Constitution was written, is exactly as its always been and shouldn't be changed, and people are whining?

[EdWhite1]

Its about time that the supreme court acknowledged the fact that the only people in DC without guns were honest law abiding citizens who could not protect themselves. The gun ban never stopped the criminals. Now at least maybe some of us can have the capacity to defend ourselves against the gang bangers with their guns and, home invaders and all the other ills that DC offers.

[LarBear]

WOW Shooting guns as a sport? What next, the legalization of hitting balls with bats as a sport? OMG this Country is becoming a Wild West Hellhole... We need to be civilized like Washington D C.... If God had wanted us to enjoy shooting rifles, or handguns.. welllllll... God would have given us a brain...
Let me see now... A man in DC was required to carry a handgun for his work (Security)... Why would he not be just as safe having that handgun in his home? And, wasn't WA DC recently the Murder Capitol of the World? But also had some of the most restrictive Gun Laws? BUT, BUT, I thought LAWS stopped crime? Maybe it was NOT Law Abiding citizens committing those crimes.... Ya think?
One would think the Supreme Court just ruled in favor of Criminals by the comments on this subject...

[mmogu77]

Most other democratic nations have far more restrictive gun laws than the US and a far lower rate of gun-related crime.
If the authors of the constiution thought that every citizen has the right to own a gun, why did they bother to write the part about militias into the second amendment?

[WalterHiggins]

Most other NON- democratic nations ALSO have far more restrictive gun laws than the US.

Zimbabwe has restrictive gun laws.

[Thirdpower]

Try reading the ruling.

[Jeffersonian22]

Holy crap...and here I thought you had to be an Islamic terrorist or child rapist for the Supreme Court to recognize you had any rights at all short of aborting your children.

[stevelaudig]

Scalia is unethical for not recusing himself, just like he was in Bush v Gore. He was prejudiced in this case and had an interest in Bush.

[djkrlsn]

The decision in Bush v Gore was based on when Florida law said the results from the election had to be reported to the secretary of state so that snide little remark is the sourest of sour grapes--and supporting the plain meaning of the phrase "right of the peoeple" is the correct decision--also look up how the word militia was defined in 1790

[seatea1967]

I'm liberal. I own a handgun. I don't see the conflict.

I am a safe and responsible gun owner. I enjoy participating in a target-shooting league, and training to learn more about tactical defe