Let Him Who Has No Gun Sell His Robe and Buy One

BY Herschel Smith
13 years, 5 months ago

From AJC:

A gun rights group filed a notice Wednesday that it will appeal a federal judge’s dismissal of a suit challenging a state law banning weapons in churches, mosques and synagogues.

John Monroe, the attorney for GeorgiaCarry.org, filed a notice that he plans to ask the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review U.S. District Judge Ashley Royal’s decision. Royal ruled Monday that a 2010 law that lists places of worship among locations where guns are not allowed did not violate the First Amendment right to freedom of religion or the Second Amendment guarantee of a right to bear arms.

The lawsuit — brought by GeorgiaCarry.org, the organization’s past president and  the minister at the Baptist Tabernacle of Thomaston — challenged the inclusion of places of worship on a list of places where guns are not allowed —  government buildings, courthouses, jails and prisons, state mental hospitals, nuclear power plants, bars without the owner’s permission and polling places.

The suit called the handgun “the quintessential self-defense weapon in the United States.” Former GeorgiaCarry.org president Ed Stone and other worshipers argued that they should be able to arm themselves “for the protection of their families and themselves” without fear of arrest and prosecution on a misdemeanor charge. The Rev. Jonathan Wilkins of the Baptist Tabernacle said he wanted to have a gun for his protection while working in his church office.

The church claimed members’ efforts to practice their faith had been “impermissibly burdened” because they felt they needed to be armed but feared being arrested if they brought their guns to services.

And Stone wrote in a filing that his  “motivation to carry a firearm as a matter of habit derives from one of my Lord’s last recorded statements at the ‘last supper,’ that ‘whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one … I believe that this injunction requires me to obtain, keep and carry a firearm wherever I happen to be.”

Jesus told us that “The things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man” (Matt 15:18).  Man is no tabula rasa, but guns are what theologians call adiaphorous, or morally neutral.  Christ knew that his people would need protection, and thus he commanded that self preservation come even before clothing.

That’s the key, isn’t it?  It’s something the pro-gun control lobby doesn’t get.  Ownership of firearms has nothing to do with wishing others harm or even in inflicting harm.  It’s always best if a weapon works as a deterrent.  But a man’s life is worth so much that God expects us to do our utmost to preserve and protect it.

Unfortunately, Judge Royal’s decision isn’t based on the idea self preservation.  This church (along with others like it) is now the most vulnerable place around for a perpetrator of a crime to cause carnage and take innocent lives.  The Judge doesn’t intend it, but she has made those parishioner’s time at worship much more dangerous.

Christ said “let him who has no sword sell his robe and buy one” (Luke 22:36).  Judge Royal has now come in between these men and their God-given duty to protect their families.


Obama Administration to Press for Gun Control

Second Amendment Challenge

UPDATE: Thanks to Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit for the link.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks


  1. On January 27, 2011 at 10:24 pm, Warbucks said:

    I rather like your analysis and in the big scheme of things it reveals a greater truth of life. Good sermon.

  2. On January 27, 2011 at 10:25 pm, Pierre Legrand said:

    From the Nation of Cowards by Jeffrey Snyder

    The Gift of Life
    Although difficult for modern man to fathom, it was once widely believed that life was a gift from God, that to not defend that life when offered violence was to hold God’s gift in contempt, to be a coward and to breach one’s duty to one’s community. A sermon given in Philadelphia in 1747 unequivocally equated the failure to defend oneself with suicide:

    He that suffers his life to be taken from him by one that hath no authority for that purpose, when he might preserve it by defense, incurs the Guilt of self murder since God hath enjoined him to seek the continuance of his life, and Nature itself teaches every creature to defend itself.

  3. On January 27, 2011 at 10:26 pm, Pierre Legrand said:


    It is a great piece of writing…sorry I forgot to add the link in my first comment.

  4. On January 27, 2011 at 10:28 pm, Warbucks said:

    There was a guy back east that formed a town and as I recall every member of the town had to sign a pledge to own a firearm before they would sell him a piece of private land. Then there was the preacher a while back that told everyone to bring a gun to serves on Sunday. I wonder how that Sunday service turned out.

  5. On January 27, 2011 at 11:03 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    Probably as safe and polite as any place on earth, Rich. You know – an armed people are a polite people.

  6. On January 27, 2011 at 11:04 pm, Donald Sensing said:

    Luke 22:36: ” He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

    V. 38: The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That is enough,” he replied.

    So two of the 12 disciples had a sword, and Jesus told them it was enough. Hmm … not exactly a ringing endorsement of bearing arms there, I’d say.

    Later, when Jesus was being arrested in the Garden, Peter drew his sword to fight the Temple police. Matthew 26:52: “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”

    Curious that Stone doesn’t mention these passages. Sorry, no, you can’t use Jesus to buttress Second Amendment rights.

    I own several firearms. I am a Methodist minister and I would have no problem with a CC permit holder carrying in my church. I think the law they are challenging is flawed and should be challenged. But really, there’s no Gospel backing for the challenge.

    But there are certainly challenges that can, and should, be made on the basis of Heller. The main reason is that the law makes places of worship defenseless and target rich. But murderous shootings certainly occur in churches.

  7. On January 27, 2011 at 11:10 pm, Steve Skubinna said:

    Warbucks, I believe you are thinking of Kennesaw, GA, where every household is required by law to keep a firearm and ammunition.

  8. On January 27, 2011 at 11:13 pm, Herschel Smith said:


    You do overreach and go to far. You try to prove too much with the additional citations.

    You haven’t included other considerations, such as the disciples stayed together after His death (and indeed His resurrection), and could make use of commonly held property, versus those who do not live with others, i.e., families, and need protection from intruders who would threaten lives that are created in God’s image.

    I went to seminary too, RTS.

  9. On January 27, 2011 at 11:16 pm, jetty said:

    “let him who has no sword sell his robe and buy one”

    Luke 22:36 is not a call to arms. Please do not misrepresent Jesus.

  10. On January 27, 2011 at 11:18 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    A sword is an arm, essentially the only one available at that time (prior to the advent of the longbow).

  11. On January 27, 2011 at 11:29 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    Oh. Oh. Okay. We have some “Jesus was a pacifist” readers. Very well then. Jesus didn’t come as a civil ruler, but to rule His kingdom. That’s why the attempt to catch Him in a contradiction (viz. woman caught in adultery, while Jesus stayed very cool and wrote in the sand) failed.

    To be sure, His kingdom does extend to the affairs of state insofar as His moral stipulations extend that far, but personally, He came to die, be resurrected and ascend for His people.

    Jesus turned the other cheek in a personal context, not the framework of civil law. And yes, personal protection because we are made in God’s image is still important, just as self defense was a legitimate defense for killing in the O.T.

    There is a scarlet thread running through the Scriptures (O.T. and N.T.), and it is Christ. His statement concerning personal defense is determinative.

    Also see R. J. Rushdoony, “The Flight From Humanity,” on Neoplatonism. Folks, Jesus was no mystic.

  12. On January 27, 2011 at 11:49 pm, Marcus said:

    Rev. Sensing,

    When reading that passage, I was under the impression that the Romans detailed to seize Jesus quite outnumbered the Apostles, and that to draw a sword in that situation would be tantamount to suicide.

    If that was indeed the case, would it be fair to think that him telling his followers not to resist is not a blanket condemnation of carrying arms and using them for self-defense?

  13. On January 28, 2011 at 12:00 am, ChrisPer said:

    Its pretty obvious from the context that Jesus was speaking descriptively about the troubled times to come. ‘That is enough’ is perhaps an impatient response to people busily missing the point.

    And there were plenty of arms other than swords at the time; bows were already widespread (eg Jonathon) , spears (eg Saul), clubs, slings, knives and so forth.

  14. On January 28, 2011 at 2:19 am, rs said:

    “Jeanne Assam”

    One armed person in the right place at the right time can make a difference.

  15. On January 28, 2011 at 7:37 am, Hankmeister said:

    The author of this commentary is absolutely right. Self-defense is not only an unalienable right bestowed upon us by our Creator, it’s a moral position which reaffirms the gift of life. Self-preservation is no vanity and liberal “Christians” had better reread their Bible, particularly Luke 22:36. JESUS WAS NOT SPEAKING IN METAPHOR. Even when Peter later recklessly drew his sword to keep Jesus from His own destiny (how could Peter know, right?), Jesus did NOT command Peter to throw or cast away his sword away but rather “to put it away” in its scabbard. The language of Luke 22:36 is rather clear, despite anti-gunners attempts to obfuscate.

    The Christian founders (no, they weren’t European Deists, they were the product of the Christian enlightenment compliments of the 1840 Great Awakening movement) consistently reaffirmed a free man’s right to arms. The Second Amendment is the reaffirmation of our God-given right to self-defense as a part of the militia. If the Second Amendment was designed to protect the “right” of a national guard which did not then exist, it would have used the terms “state militia”, “national militia”, or “select militia” instead. A “well-regulate” militia is one in which each man regulated himself with respect to having a functioning firearm and enough shot and powder to put up a reasonable defense against tyrants foreign and domestic. Welcome to history class.

  16. On January 28, 2011 at 8:22 am, M. Simon said:

    (no, they weren’t European Deists, they were the product of the Christian enlightenment compliments of the 1840 Great Awakening movement)

    A century too late.

    The most dangerous man is the sleeper who thinks he is awake. Be careful out there.

  17. On January 28, 2011 at 10:16 am, Rock said:

    So he missed the 7 on the keyboard.


  18. On January 28, 2011 at 2:43 pm, AStev said:

    No, Luke 22:36 is not a “call to arms” as some have said, but it is a call for prudent precaution and self-defense as they prepare for their missionary activity in the coming years. This is the clearest sense of this verse.

    (The only way ‘sword’ in this verse is a metaphor is if the other commonplace items – knapsack, moneybag, sandals – are also metaphors. But this would be a peculiar reading of the verse that one would only resort to if they were trying to read a pacifist meaning into the verse, rather than extract the true meaning out of it.)

    Scripture makes it clear that vengeance (and vigilantism) are out of bounds. i.e. if you’ve been wronged or insulted, turn the other cheek. The correct response to past insult or injury is forgiveness.

    However, self defense from imminent *present* injury is permissible, which is why Jesus told them to have swords. Why were two swords “enough”? Because that would be more than sufficient to defend the group from any bandits they might encounter on the road. Indeed, the very fact that he says the two swords are “enough” indicates that Jesus has not prohibited the disciples from being armed.

    What’s more, the defense of others (particularly those who are themselves defenseless) is not optional, but rather, a duty. The person who is capable of defending an innocent from injury, but chooses not to, is effectually conspiring with the oppressor/attacker.

    Why did Jesus tell Peter to sheathe his sword? Partly because Jesus was not being attacked, but being arrested by legitimate divinely-established authorities, but more significantly, because Jesus HAD to be arrested and crucified in order to fulfill God’s long-ordained plan of redemption.

  19. On January 28, 2011 at 2:52 pm, Alec Rawls said:

    Minister Sensing’s interpretations of Jesus are both terribly out of historical context and ignorant as to Jesus’ purpose. On the history, Sensing ignores the fact that it was ILLEGAL for Jews to carry swords in Roman controlled Judea. Jesus advocated swords even in the face of laws against it, but Sensing denies that this is much endorsement of bearing arms because Jesus considered two swords enough. Ridiculous.

    Ditto for Jesus’ warning that it would be suicide for his compatriots to try to do battle against the Roman soldiers who would take him into custody. It is absurd to read this highly situational warning to his compatriots (“put your sword back in its place”) as a general moral judgment against forcible resistance to evil.

    Then there is the religious purpose of Jesus’ instruction to acquire swords. He was fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah that the savior would be “numbered amongst the transgressors.” Isaiah 53:12:

    “Therefore will I divide him [a portion] with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

    Jesus had to commit a crime and this is the act of civil disobedience that he chose: to take up his natural right to be armed for self defense. He couldn’t do anything immoral, and here was a law he could break while staying fully on the side of right. This is the reason two swords were enough. One sword would have numbered Jesus amongst the transgressors.

    This choice by Jesus of what law to break is a very strong statement about the natural right of armed defense. Sorry Minister Sensing, but the words of Jesus do indeed buttress Second Amendment rights.

  20. On January 28, 2011 at 4:28 pm, Alec Rawls said:

    If anyone doubts that Jesus’ purpose with the swords was to fulfill the prophesy of Isaiah, it is right there in Luke 22:35-38.

    (35)Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”

    “Nothing,” they answered.

    (36)He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. (37) It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”

    (38)The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”

    “That is enough,” he replied.

  21. On January 28, 2011 at 5:18 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    Just to circle back around on this issue, folks, I know all about the hyper-pious Bible commentaries that refuse to acknowledge that Jesus said what he said. Metaphor, they claim. It must be, because he later commanded Peter to sheath his sword.

    To be frank, I have seldom seen such straining and dishonesty among commentators as on this passage. It reaches a peak in absurdity with the Puritan commentators (see Matthew Henry and John Gill). They take the same approach with Rahab’s lie, condemning it while joyful that God worked it out anyway.


    The disciples were already packing weapons. They produced two swords, no doubt owned for self defense. Alec Rawls is right also; Christ’s point was to be named among the transgressors, while also doing something not sinful (like owning a weapon).

    Folks, when a Bible interpretation is so strained that commentators have to close their eyes and make up things in order to try to convince you (and them) that it doesn’t really mean what it says, then you know that something is very wrong.

    Remember: The perspicuity of the Scriptures. It’s an important doctrine.

    Finally, even if there is an aspect of Christ’s warning to His disciples that there will be much spiritual warfare in the future, it doesn’t undo what we have concluded about this passage. The swords were real, not make-believe. He was referring to actual metal, not a phantom.

  22. On January 28, 2011 at 5:24 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    Oh, and one more thing. Pacifism doesn’t really have a strong following among the Church fathers, e.g., Athanasius:

    “Letter to Amun” (before 356 AD): “For in other things that occur in this life, we find distinctions: such as, it is not permitted to murder, but to kill the enemy in war is both lawful and worthy of praise. So then those who perform in the best way in war are given great rewards, and monuments are erected to proclaim their deeds.”

  23. On February 16, 2011 at 6:58 pm, Dave said:

    “Unfortunately, Judge Royal’s decision isn’t based on the idea self preservation. This church (along with others like it) is now the most vulnerable place around for a perpetrator of a crime to cause carnage and take innocent lives. The Judge doesn’t intend it, but she has made those parishioner’s time at worship much more dangerous.”

    For example the murder of Dr. Tiller in his Kansas church.

  24. On February 16, 2011 at 11:13 pm, Herschel Smith said:

    So Dave. Let’s try to narrow in on your issue with just a couple of questions. Are you under the impression that whomever perpetrated this crime against whomever this is, would have been dissuaded from doing so had there just been a law against having weapons in this particular location? Where did you learn something like that?

  25. On March 2, 2014 at 11:51 am, Wraith said:

    Another thought on the subject, quite handily crushing the pacifist arguments.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You are currently reading "Let Him Who Has No Gun Sell His Robe and Buy One", entry #6171 on The Captain's Journal.

This article is filed under the category(s) Federal Firearms Laws,Firearms,Religion,Second Amendment and was published January 27th, 2011 by Herschel Smith.

If you're interested in what else the The Captain's Journal has to say, you might try thumbing through the archives and visiting the main index, or; perhaps you would like to learn more about TCJ.

26th MEU (10)
Abu Muqawama (12)
ACOG (2)
ACOGs (1)
Afghan National Army (36)
Afghan National Police (17)
Afghanistan (704)
Afghanistan SOFA (4)
Agriculture in COIN (3)
AGW (1)
Air Force (40)
Air Power (10)
al Qaeda (83)
Ali al-Sistani (1)
America (22)
Ammunition (278)
Animals (295)
Ansar al Sunna (15)
Anthropology (3)
Antonin Scalia (1)
AR-15s (374)
Arghandab River Valley (1)
Arlington Cemetery (2)
Army (87)
Assassinations (2)
Assault Weapon Ban (29)
Australian Army (7)
Azerbaijan (4)
Backpacking (3)
Badr Organization (8)
Baitullah Mehsud (21)
Basra (17)
BATFE (224)
Battle of Bari Alai (2)
Battle of Wanat (18)
Battle Space Weight (3)
Bin Laden (7)
Blogroll (3)
Blogs (24)
Body Armor (23)
Books (3)
Border War (18)
Brady Campaign (1)
Britain (38)
British Army (35)
Camping (5)
Canada (17)
Castle Doctrine (1)
Caucasus (6)
Center For a New American Security (8)
Charity (3)
China (16)
Christmas (16)
CIA (30)
Civilian National Security Force (3)
Col. Gian Gentile (9)
Combat Outposts (3)
Combat Video (2)
Concerned Citizens (6)
Constabulary Actions (3)
Coolness Factor (3)
COP Keating (4)
Corruption in COIN (4)
Council on Foreign Relations (1)
Counterinsurgency (218)
DADT (2)
David Rohde (1)
Defense Contractors (2)
Department of Defense (210)
Department of Homeland Security (26)
Disaster Preparedness (5)
Distributed Operations (5)
Dogs (15)
Donald Trump (27)
Drone Campaign (4)
EFV (3)
Egypt (12)
El Salvador (1)
Embassy Security (1)
Enemy Spotters (1)
Expeditionary Warfare (17)
F-22 (2)
F-35 (1)
Fallujah (17)
Far East (3)
Fathers and Sons (2)
Favorite (1)
Fazlullah (3)
FBI (39)
Featured (189)
Federal Firearms Laws (18)
Financing the Taliban (2)
Firearms (1,781)
Football (1)
Force Projection (35)
Force Protection (4)
Force Transformation (1)
Foreign Policy (27)
Fukushima Reactor Accident (6)
Ganjgal (1)
Garmsir (1)
general (15)
General Amos (1)
General James Mattis (1)
General McChrystal (44)
General McKiernan (6)
General Rodriguez (3)
General Suleimani (9)
Georgia (19)
Google (1)
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (1)
Gun Control (1,653)
Guns (2,321)
Guns In National Parks (3)
Haditha Roundup (10)
Haiti (2)
Haqqani Network (9)
Hate Mail (8)
Hekmatyar (1)
Heroism (5)
Hezbollah (12)
High Capacity Magazines (16)
High Value Targets (9)
Homecoming (1)
Homeland Security (3)
Horses (2)
Humor (72)
Hunting (36)
ICOS (1)
IEDs (7)
Immigration (108)
India (10)
Infantry (4)
Information Warfare (4)
Infrastructure (4)
Intelligence (23)
Intelligence Bulletin (6)
Iran (171)
Iraq (379)
Iraq SOFA (23)
Islamic Facism (64)
Islamists (98)
Israel (19)
Jaish al Mahdi (21)
Jalalabad (1)
Japan (3)
Jihadists (81)
John Nagl (5)
Joint Intelligence Centers (1)
JRTN (1)
Kabul (1)
Kajaki Dam (1)
Kamdesh (9)
Kandahar (12)
Karachi (7)
Kashmir (2)
Khost Province (1)
Khyber (11)
Knife Blogging (7)
Korea (4)
Korengal Valley (3)
Kunar Province (20)
Kurdistan (3)
Language in COIN (5)
Language in Statecraft (1)
Language Interpreters (2)
Lashkar-e-Taiba (2)
Law Enforcement (6)
Lawfare (14)
Leadership (6)
Lebanon (6)
Leon Panetta (2)
Let Them Fight (2)
Libya (14)
Lines of Effort (3)
Littoral Combat (8)
Logistics (50)
Long Guns (1)
Lt. Col. Allen West (2)
Marine Corps (280)
Marines in Bakwa (1)
Marines in Helmand (67)
Marjah (4)
Media (68)
Medical (146)
Memorial Day (6)
Mexican Cartels (41)
Mexico (61)
Michael Yon (6)
Micromanaging the Military (7)
Middle East (1)
Military Blogging (26)
Military Contractors (5)
Military Equipment (25)
Militia (9)
Mitt Romney (3)
Monetary Policy (1)
Moqtada al Sadr (2)
Mosul (4)
Mountains (25)
MRAPs (1)
Mullah Baradar (1)
Mullah Fazlullah (1)
Mullah Omar (3)
Musa Qala (4)
Music (25)
Muslim Brotherhood (6)
Nation Building (2)
National Internet IDs (1)
National Rifle Association (95)
NATO (15)
Navy (30)
Navy Corpsman (1)
NCOs (3)
News (1)
NGOs (3)
Nicholas Schmidle (2)
Now Zad (19)
NSA (3)
NSA James L. Jones (6)
Nuclear (62)
Nuristan (8)
Obama Administration (221)
Offshore Balancing (1)
Operation Alljah (7)
Operation Khanjar (14)
Ossetia (7)
Pakistan (165)
Paktya Province (1)
Palestine (5)
Patriotism (7)
Patrolling (1)
Pech River Valley (11)
Personal (73)
Petraeus (14)
Pictures (1)
Piracy (13)
Pistol (4)
Pizzagate (21)
Police (654)
Police in COIN (3)
Policy (15)
Politics (975)
Poppy (2)
PPEs (1)
Prisons in Counterinsurgency (12)
Project Gunrunner (20)
PRTs (1)
Qatar (1)
Quadrennial Defense Review (2)
Quds Force (13)
Quetta Shura (1)
RAND (3)
Recommended Reading (14)
Refueling Tanker (1)
Religion (493)
Religion and Insurgency (19)
Reuters (1)
Rick Perry (4)
Rifles (1)
Roads (4)
Rolling Stone (1)
Ron Paul (1)
ROTC (1)
Rules of Engagement (75)
Rumsfeld (1)
Russia (37)
Sabbatical (1)
Sangin (1)
Saqlawiyah (1)
Satellite Patrols (2)
Saudi Arabia (4)
Scenes from Iraq (1)
Second Amendment (675)
Second Amendment Quick Hits (2)
Secretary Gates (9)
Sharia Law (3)
Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahiden (1)
SIIC (2)
Sirajuddin Haqqani (1)
Small Wars (72)
Snipers (9)
Sniveling Lackeys (2)
Soft Power (4)
Somalia (8)
Sons of Afghanistan (1)
Sons of Iraq (2)
Special Forces (28)
Squad Rushes (1)
State Department (23)
Statistics (1)
Sunni Insurgency (10)
Support to Infantry Ratio (1)
Supreme Court (57)
Survival (186)
SWAT Raids (57)
Syria (38)
Tactical Drills (38)
Tactical Gear (14)
Taliban (168)
Taliban Massing of Forces (4)
Tarmiyah (1)
TBI (1)
Technology (21)
Tehrik-i-Taliban (78)
Terrain in Combat (1)
Terrorism (96)
Thanksgiving (13)
The Anbar Narrative (23)
The Art of War (5)
The Fallen (1)
The Long War (20)
The Surge (3)
The Wounded (13)
Thomas Barnett (1)
Transnational Insurgencies (5)
Tribes (5)
TSA (25)
TSA Ineptitude (14)
TTPs (4)
U.S. Border Patrol (6)
U.S. Border Security (19)
U.S. Sovereignty (24)
UAVs (2)
UBL (4)
Ukraine (10)
Uncategorized (98)
Universal Background Check (3)
Unrestricted Warfare (4)
USS Iwo Jima (2)
USS San Antonio (1)
Uzbekistan (1)
V-22 Osprey (4)
Veterans (3)
Vietnam (1)
War & Warfare (414)
War & Warfare (41)
War Movies (4)
War Reporting (21)
Wardak Province (1)
Warriors (6)
Waziristan (1)
Weapons and Tactics (79)
West Point (1)
Winter Operations (1)
Women in Combat (21)
WTF? (1)
Yemen (1)

July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006

about · archives · contact · register

Copyright © 2006-2024 Captain's Journal. All rights reserved.