Profile

Cover photo
Darren Wolfe
57 followers|1,735,102 views
AboutPostsPhotosYouTube

Stream

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
'Cuz you've got to be crazy to oppose the govt! (sarcasm)
... gun owners need to be on vigilant guard against eroding the right to keep and bear arms via so-called “mental health” prohibitions ...
20
1
William Arrington's profile photoDarren Wolfe's profile photoSamuel Polischuk's profile photoMike Solaro's profile photo
9 comments
 
+Samuel Polischuk cool, newton in sussex county? i have family in the le community here. There is some confusion over some of the ridiculous gun laws here, but if you go on the nj state police website it does state that they are legal. 
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
The US homicide rate in 2014, the most recent year available, was 4.5 per 100,000.
15
1
Floyd Perry's profile photoStumpy Fisherman's profile photoAlways Hunting's profile photo
3 comments
 
Except in Chicagoagra!
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

Discussion  - 
 
Regal Cinemas, the largest movie theater chain in the country, has a gun policy that prohibits people from bringing guns into its movie theaters. That includes people with concealed-carry permits. That is one stupid policy. In Virginia, where I live, people with concealed-carry permits are legally permitted to carry concealed guns, with certain exceptions. One of those exceptions is when a private establishment prohibits people from bringing guns...
1
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

Discussion  - 
 
Social factors drive the murder rate up & down not access to guns. Hear Prof Roth of OSU on the subject:
Since World War II, the homicide rate in the U.S. has been three to ten times higher than in Canada, Western Europe, and Japan. This, however, has not always been the case. What caused the dramatic change?
2
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
11
2
Floyd Perry's profile photo
 
Let's get this off to the DC bunch right away. I know they already know this is TRUE but maybe, just maybe it might wake a few of them up.
Just saying
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
When you don't have the facts on your side you play the race card.
It’s not our side that wants to keep women and minorities disarmed – it’s theirs...
10
1
William Arrington's profile photoJT Indermuhle's profile photoRaul Rodriguez's profile photo
3 comments
 
I read the article, not the publication, The Nation. Based on the article there is a lot of focus on the topic of white men acting out.

Is it me? Or are there intelligent people left around? Does it not make it racist, when someone openly and continually refers and condemns, or even bases subjects purely on racial concepts. Not just towards blacks, but towards any "race"?

I'm sick an tired of hearing white fear smear. To only hear the ones talking about it claiming they aren't racist. Look I'm not classed by whites as white, I would be Hispanic to them despite not feeling like a full Hispanic. I'm too culturally mixed to associate purely to one side or the other. I say it like that because I don't believe there is such things as race. I actually believe in science and the claim that the Human race is just that. Human. We are actually one of a very select few species of animals in this planet without a cousin species. Without actual racial diversity. We are it, the last, just human.

Hearing constant attacks by social liberals and social progressives on how whites do this, and whites do that, and whites hate these things. It's sickening already. That is the same as hearing in the old days people talking about slaves. "Oh the negros are like this and like that." Shut up already. If you aren't racist, stop obsessing over racial divides and start obsessing over cultural acceptance.

There is no race war. Only people instigating racial conflicts and any article that hails itself as a picture of acceptance but bitches about a so called racial group, is nothing more than an agitator, a racial divider and promoter of conflict based on not accepting a group of people.

To claim you are more accepting, means to accept the beliefs of those you also disagree with. Otherwise you aren't accepting at all. Just another individual with biased views you choose to practice and believe in. Acceptance is literally none biased towards anyone or anything. The minute you hold on to views and ideas that favor one side over the other. That you have open and disagree views towards anything you can not accept, like white supremacy ideals, you instantly void your self given title of being accepting of others. Or more accepting than someone else. You just literally became exactly as the people you hail yourself as being better than, by not accepting certain people's beliefs. It doesn't mean you have to believe in their views, it just means you have to accept others have them and have a right to have them regardless. Humans are not above other humans, which would instantly drop you into the belief of elite-ness and classes. That we should have classes of citizens and divide our society as not equals based on the old school ideals of entitlement.

You know how you address a problem? By not creating a new one, or agitating a current one. You bring a solution, a plan of action to meet in the middle. So far, the only thing I've seen is an attempt to replace one racist group with another, or addressing an idea with off topic concepts.

Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with race. If that is your association, you have more problems than you think. If you want to argue the merrits of a DEFENSE policy, do it based on the qualities of the policy. Not some tangent to insert your racist views in, or attempt to promote more tension and hostility. Otherwise there is a word for that, hypocrisy.

Talk about the good and the bad about it. For example: Good - Does not promote individuals to be placed at higher risk of injury or loss of life during an altercation. Won't subject up standing citizens who find themselves in the horrible situation of being injured or killed for acting out in their best interest to survive or prevent serious injuries.

Bad - may lead certain individuals to attempt using the law as a technicality to avoid criminal charges.

Notice how I presented a light view of the negative and a higher one of the possitive? That's how you approach sensibly a subject without creating conflict, aggression, or division. You present positives and negatives. If you want to be factual present recorded cases to follow up your claims. But ranting for ranting sake is purely for the goal of creating division and unrest.

Chaos is the goal of these instigators of hate. So that they can turn around and say, see told you so. Which will open the doors for them to establish their ridiculous policies aimed at control and submission. They wanted extremist to take guns to the RNC to create chaos, it failed. Instead chaos went to the biggest instigators of the two party, the DNC and they built their fence walls and censored their media to hide the chaos outside their own doors. Hypocrisy to the letter. Far from unity, far from safety, far from acceptance of all, and far from promoting a better world and lifestyle for all.
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
49
6
Richard Parker's profile photoRay Ray's profile photo
2 comments
Ray Ray
 
what u got to say about that obama your momma and the clinton clan lol nothing at all
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

Political Issues  - 
 
'The humanoid collective is in an unforgiving snit over the refusal of NFL quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, to stand for the playing of the national anthem. For a society that was once grounded in a greater tolerance for individual values and preferences, this reaction is another symptom of a system that no longer serves – much less tolerates – the diverse nature of human life.

'Why would an intelligent person in any country want to stand for and sing a “national anthem?” '
4
1
Anotherman Inthecrowd's profile photoJT Indermuhle's profile photoDarren Wolfe's profile photo
8 comments
 
+JT Indermuhle If you read what I posted you'll see that the hate America nonsense doesn't apply. You're too blinded by emotional nationalism to see this. 
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
An in depth explanation of how "Gun Control and the War on Drugs" relate to each other: https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/gun-control-war-drugs/
19
4
Chris Lichowicz's profile photoRay Ray's profile photoJT Indermuhle's profile photo
3 comments
 
In a perfect world it'd be like beer. Once the guns are put away, crack one open. 
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
Regal Cinemas, the largest movie theater chain in the country, has a gun policy that prohibits people from bringing guns into its movie theaters. That includes people with concealed-carry permits. That is one stupid policy. In Virginia, where I live, people with concealed-carry permits are legally permitted to carry concealed guns, with certain exceptions. One of those exceptions is when a private establishment prohibits people from bringing guns...
8
3
Add a comment...

Darren Wolfe

2nd Amendment  - 
 
To all of you NRA members who support gun control this is what it leads to, disarmament.
Venezuelan police crushed and chopped up nearly 2,000 shotguns and pistols in a Caracas city square on Wednesday, as the new interior minister relaunched a long-stalled gun control campaign in one of the world's most crime-ridden countries.
8
1
Link master Spitz (‫لحم الخنزير الأكل الكافر‬‎)'s profile photoGreg Copeland's profile photoJason Hatcher's profile photoDarren Wolfe's profile photo
10 comments
 
+Marty Cortines
Yours is, unfortunately, a common POV among gun owners. The fact that there are some who possibly shouldn't have guns doesn't mean we should give the govt the power to deny us our gun rights. Remember that the power to approve gun sales is also the power to deny them. It makes no sense to argue that we need guns to oppose govt tyranny then give the govt the power to control guns. What do you think they'll do with that power? They'll disarm us just like they did in the UK, Japan, & many other places. It always starts with "reasonable" measures to allegedly keep us safe. (See "Japanese Gun Control" http://www.guncite.com/journals/dkjgc.html ) That's the plan here too. Every gun control measure implemented is a step towards disarmament. (Here's something I wrote that lists calls for incremental disarmament in the US "Don't Let Gun Rights Haters Intimidate You" http://theinternationallibertarian.blogspot.com/2016/02/dont-let-gun-rights-haters-intimidate.html & http://www.ammoland.com/2016/03/dont-let-gun-rights-haters-intimidate-you/#axzz4HuB7Ufro )

"No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction."
http://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Greenwood.pdf#page=179&zoom=auto,-55,368

What causes crime? Listen to Prof Roth on the subject http://nij.gov/multimedia/presenter/presenter-roth/Pages/welcome.aspx Once the cause is understood we can find the answer. Until then......
Add a comment...
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Story
Introduction
Darren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. Darren presently blogs as the International Libertarian. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.