Gun rights group raffles rifle, picture of Hillary Clinton

Posted September 28, 2016
Updated September 29, 2016

— A vocal gun rights group is raffling off an AR-15 rifle, 1,000 rounds of ammunition and a portrait of Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton to raise money for its federal political action committee.

"Of course, we won’t tell you what to do with the photo, but when we ran a picture of Hillary on the front of our newsletter, we heard it was very popular at the range," Grass Roots North Carolina's web page publicizing the raffle reads. The post predicts there will be "panic buying" if Clinton is elected, meaning "there won’t be a gun (or ammunition) available for love nor money" if the Democrat wins.

Trump holds rally in Wilmington Trump's 2nd Amendment comment creates stir Money raised from the drawing, which will be held on Election Day, will go to the group's political victory fund and, according to the group's website, will be used to make independent expenditures against "anti-gunners" such as gubernatorial candidate Roy Cooper and U.S. Senate candidate Deborah Ross, both of whom are Democrats.

Grass Roots NC is a frequent presence at the General Assembly, calling for fewer restrictions on the ability to purchase and carry firearms.

Update: Paul Valone, president of Grass Roots NC, tells WRAL News that ticket sales are coming in "briskly." He said attention the group has received over the past 24 hours from writers for national media outlets who perceive the fundraiser as an implicit threat against Clinton is unwarranted.

"No reasonable person with a basic understanding of the English language could possible construe any sort of threat or encouragement from that basic message," Valone said Thursday.

Meanwhile, Peter Ambler, executive director of Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC, which was formed by former Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, said the raffle is ill-conceived.

"This dangerous stunt just further degrades the debate on gun safety that our country needs," Ambler said in an email. "North Carolina voters and law-abiding gun owners everywhere deserve a lot better."


Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Ken Ackerman Sep 29, 7:26 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    I think you mean, Hitler the Fascist.

    We are much more likely to see ovens if Trump happens to win.

    That said I wouldn't be surprised if there were some ovens already under construction in NC.

  • Howard Roark Sep 29, 3:26 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    As opposed to the authoritarian, Donald Trump?

    The same Donald that has publicly threatened the 1st ammendment, as well as the 8th and 14th?

    While I am absoultely no Hillary fan, there's a reason that most college educated citizens will back Hillary Clinton despite her baggage. Along with many unaffiliated voters, I'm quite certain I know who the bigger threat to this country is.

    This year, it's not about who I support, but more of a strategic vote to keep that jackwagon megalomaniac Trump from coming anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

  • Barney Gravel Sep 29, 2:55 p.m.
    user avatar

    I think they call that a target not a picture. Amazing when I was a boy we shot pictures of Adolph Hitler they now shoot targets of our potential fascist leader. Remember Hitler was a national socialist, just like Hillary. Hmmm, gas ovens for gun owning white males?

  • Ken Ackerman Sep 29, 2:38 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    Let's see :). The one I quote most often is, "I'm not a smart man." But maybe you were aiming for "Stupid is as Stupid Does"? :)

  • Ken Ackerman Sep 29, 2:37 p.m.
    user avatar

    This is a pretty despicable group of people.

    I don't know about other candidates but the one targeted by this group specifically said to get "guns out of the hands of people that shouldn't have them." Now most of those people already possess those weapons illegally so I'm not sure why legitimate gun owners feel so threatened.

    If you want to see what the gun problem really is, take a look at the section on WRAL's webpage that lists the arrests in Wake county. Notice the number of them that are charged with "possession of a firearm by a felon".

    Legal gun owners are protected by more than just the 2nd Amendment. There's something tucked in there about unlawful seizure that would have to be resolved as well.

  • Michael Sullivan Sep 29, 12:44 p.m.
    user avatar

    What did Forrest Gump say?

  • Kevin Yen Sep 29, 11:59 a.m.
    user avatar

    Laying a bullet on her picture is just as good as stomping on the American made US flag with Chinese made materials, once she's been elected.

  • Charlie McDarris Sep 29, 11:20 a.m.
    user avatar

    I was in Texas recently visiting relatives. I picked up a Guns & Ammo magazine and happened across a letter from Wayne LaPierre, the Director of the NRA (or whatever title he has). Wow, talk about frothing the base to get contributions. He has played the right wing gunners like a fiddle, but how else to support the big salaries. After reading his letter, I have been looking out my window every day for the Obama Secret Guard to come and collect everyone's guns. As a gun shop owner told me a few years ago, Obama gets the Salesperson of the Year Award - laughing how everyone was buying out of fear of Obama. I guess now Hillary will help them sell guns.

  • Pete Muller Sep 29, 9:46 a.m.
    user avatar

    Mr. Powell. We have the separation of powers in our government. I am surprised that you think the Supreme Court could change a constitutional amendment. They can't. It is Congress that can do it. It takes a 2/3 rd majority in the house and the senate plus a change would have to be ratified by 3/5 of all states in our country. You probably know that the likelihood of that to happen is zero.

  • Howard Roark Sep 29, 9:38 a.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    A ratification of the 2nd would take far more than the power that lies solely with the SCOTUS. The interpretation of the second is what likely lies in the balance.