I am moving towards wanting to carry two handguns most of the time. I prefer a revolver as my primary but I understand the potential drawbacks of needing to reload quickly under certain situations so having a "New York Reload" on hand would bring peace of mind. I'm thinking of going with an LCP as my BUG in the pocket. My reasoning is that between the two platforms of revolver & semi-auto one of them is going to work for sure and the LCP won't weigh down my carry side too much. Or, I may just carry another revolver, a J-Frame in the pocket so I can carry the same ammo for both primary and BUG. I haven't decided yet.
But there is more to it then just faster reloads. Carrying two guns is beneficial in more ways then one, particularly if you ever needed to arm someone else in your party if something is going down or if you either drop or have your primary wrested away from you. Any current or former LEO who may be on the forum doesn't need me to tell them the benefits of carrying two guns.
However, I'm just a civilian and one thing has given me second thoughts on doing this. I watched a video on Youtube by "Paul Harrell" titled "Why I don't Like Hyper Ammo". In it he describes a case where someone who had been carrying two guns had fended off an attacker with one of them. He didn't actually fire a shot but while in court the DA was arguing before the judge that he was guilty of some crime because "MOST PEOPLE DON'T GO AROUND CARRYING TWO GUNS!" was his exact statement (28:30).
He was attempting to portray the victim as a real bad apple, a "gun nut" who was loaded for bear and looking for trouble because he had the audacity to carry two guns. While it doesn't sound like the DA was able to make anything out of that argument the fact that he even tried bugs me. I can see how that could be used against someone and depending on the DA, district, judge and/or jury maybe not everyone will fare as well as the person in Mr. Harrell's video?
But there is more to it then just faster reloads. Carrying two guns is beneficial in more ways then one, particularly if you ever needed to arm someone else in your party if something is going down or if you either drop or have your primary wrested away from you. Any current or former LEO who may be on the forum doesn't need me to tell them the benefits of carrying two guns.
However, I'm just a civilian and one thing has given me second thoughts on doing this. I watched a video on Youtube by "Paul Harrell" titled "Why I don't Like Hyper Ammo". In it he describes a case where someone who had been carrying two guns had fended off an attacker with one of them. He didn't actually fire a shot but while in court the DA was arguing before the judge that he was guilty of some crime because "MOST PEOPLE DON'T GO AROUND CARRYING TWO GUNS!" was his exact statement (28:30).
He was attempting to portray the victim as a real bad apple, a "gun nut" who was loaded for bear and looking for trouble because he had the audacity to carry two guns. While it doesn't sound like the DA was able to make anything out of that argument the fact that he even tried bugs me. I can see how that could be used against someone and depending on the DA, district, judge and/or jury maybe not everyone will fare as well as the person in Mr. Harrell's video?