The whole battle ground changes after if McDonald is decided in our favor. Constitutional jurisprudence dictates the once recognized the RKBA can not be taxed, possibly can be licensed/regulated, and the method of bearing might be left up to state law (open or concealed).
I don't personally agree with the latter, as I would prefer an unregulated Open Carry right as generally described in SCOTUS's
DredScott ("carry arms where ever they went") and Robertson v Baldwin ("laws prohibiting concealed weapons do not violate the 2A"). But it is likely states like TX and FL will pass constitutional muster.
I agree with all the above idealistic views on Rights and bearing arms openly to secure that right for all posterity that have been eloquently expressed. But where we seem to have a disconnect is the understanding of prospects for positive changes in Sacramentoand public opinion in the current situation and later absent successin McDonald.
My money is on McDonald and Gura/CGF. My vision and there's includes LOC. Waiting for the situation which launched successful OC in both Ohio and Wisconsin, having a court protected Right, is the politicallyand judiciallywisest course of action. We need that Federal Judicial protection to have any hope of securing RKBA in our lifetime in CA. Anything else is pie in the sky wishful thinking. Sac will move fast to squash OC without a win at SCOTUS.