Yes, they're talking about 1379.3 (N)(9).
Take a very close look at the dicta in Fluker, specifically the part about a mechanistic standard for "concealed." The Louisiana Supreme Court may or may not have backed off the notion that there is such a thing as an unconcealed carried handgun; Bias listed three illustrative examples of an unconcealed weapon, one of them being a pistol belted to the hip, but the talk in Fluker was as if only the word "intentional" saved a holstered gun from being intentionally concealed - which would imply it was "concealed." Maybe the difference is the belt. Maybe its a signal that 160+ years of jurisprudence are about to get dumped. You don't want to find out as a criminal defendant.