New York Reload LCP Style

Thats cool so you could have a gun while the other is being sent in for a recall for being a POS?

LCP's aren't POS's. The recall was to fix a possible saftey issue and it was wise and prudent for them to fix. Ruger did the right thing and treated customers well. The LCP is higher quality than most pistols costing $300

Well, and of course I say this as a new yorker ..heh , you're right in the initial post when you say the new york reload really applies to revolvers as for most people they are far slower to reload. Personally I don't see much point in having two pocket autos, when a magazine reload would be available for a primary defensive gun.
I see it like this..

I carry a .45 caliber 1911 OWB with 8+1 condition one. I also carry a reload in a quality magazine holster which keeps it always ready pointing exactly in the direction I expect it to be if I need to reach for it. If for some reason I had to do it, and I hope I don't, it makes sense that it would likely be significantly faster for me to fire 8 rounds, draw and slap the new mag in and continue firing if needed .. than it would to be fumbling in a pocket for a second gun. So, trading off speed, accuracy and 17 rounds of .45acp for 14 rounds of .380 .. nope, not for me.

What IS the fastest reload ?

Some would say drawing a second gun. But that depends where that second gun is and how hard it'll be to get to it. What type of gun it is can also be a factor. (A NAA won't be too fast on the first shot, once you're able to pluck it out from it's location)

Still, others argue that a well placed magazine is faster than going for a second gun. A reload coming off the belt would be faster than a .38 snub on the ankle or stuffed in a Thunderwear rig that requires you to unzip your pants to access.

So, which is it ? A magazine or a second gun?

I say, neither. The fastest reload is.............no reload. This is where high capacity comes into play.

I carry a tiny 9mm and a J-frame all the time, and occasionally, a 1911 too.

It's not a matter of having "enough boolits", it's a matter of being able to get to a gun, any gun, as quickly as possible, regardless fo the situation (coat on or off, seatbelt on, sitting down, etc.)

Somebody must, but not me. John



Bottom of the page http://bellcharteroakholsters.com/pancakes.html

And back to reality in 3, 2, 1.......

You people are sissies. Take a lesson from the ultimate New York Reloader:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YkJcCEdVqc

haha! that kid rocks! get him a cpl-

IMHO the major advantage to carrying two handguns is less a speedy 'reload' and more having a separate gun in a different place, accessible to the other hand. A second gun can be carried on the opposite side, at a different level (high=shoulder/neck, middle=waist, low=ankle) so that it's available to the support hand should your shooting hand be disabled or otherwise occupied. There are a good many working LEOs who carry BUGs in this fashion.

Not as many private citizens do- but there are some who make a habit of it. If you need it, you need it- and as some say, "Two is one and one is none."

JMHO, YMMV,

lpl

I carry my LCP as a BUG when I wear my vest.
There's normally a Glock on my hip, or a .38 in my pocket.

Often overlooked is the idea that having a gun accessible by the weak hand can be an advantage - better so than a spare magazine, depending on the scenario.

The idea has it's merits, but weather it would trump carrying a reload would have everything to do with how the pistols were carried, IMO. Something like one for each hand, or one carried on the belt line and one accessible while belted into a vehicle.

A diving tactical flip looks plain silly with just one handgun.

in the days of percussion revolvers two were often carried because not only were they slooow to reload [unless you carried a spare cylinder like Clint] they would often jam on cap fragments,which could be embarassing during an Apache attack.As percussion gave way to cartridge there were no longer any cap fragments to jam the action,guns were quicker to reload,and a whole beltload of cartridges could be carried for the same weight as a spare revolver,and so the two gun rig fades into history...

Thats cool so you could have a gun while the other is being sent in for a recall for being a POS?

Click to expand...

wow. seriously? you are the epitome of ignorance.

I'm sorry, but the LCP bash does not belong here.

I have never carried two small pistols at the same time. For me it would be the Kel-tec and a Smith 642. I do carry the Kel-tec in the back pocket at all times (except on duty, not authorized) even if I have a Glock 23 with me.

If I was authorized... on duty I would have the Glock 22 on the belt, Smith 642 on the ankle, and the Kel-tec on the vest. However, their purpose would not be for a quick reload.

I can reload the Glock pretty dang quick, but not the Smith or Kel-tec. I do keep an extra mag for the Kel-tec in the pocket, but it will still be a slow reload. My biggest concern would be dropping the mag and loosing it. They are small and if I am in a shooting the fine motor skills will be long gone. Same issue with the Smith and a speed strip.