The case of Peruta V San Diego, as now confirmed via the 9h Circuit, states specifically you do not have a 2A right to carry a concealed weapon. The en banc court affirmed the district courts’ judgments and held that there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public. The opinion also states that a "good cause" policy via local sheriffs policy to issue CCW permits isn't unconstitutional. http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...County-of-San-Diego_Ninth-Circuit-Opinion.pdf The right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed firearm in public is not, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment. This article makes clear how the court determined the issue, specifically starting on page 23 of the opinion History relevant to the 2A: http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/06/ninth-circuit-peruta-ruling/486446/ In his 52-page majority opinion in Peruta v. County of San Diego, Judge William Fletcher laid out an exhaustive history of British and American laws prohibiting concealed weapons, tracing a continuous thread from a decree by Edward I to his sheriffs in 1299 to a series of state supreme-court decisions in the 19th century. “Based on the overwhelming consensus of historical sources, we conclude that the protection of the Second Amendment—whatever the scope of that protection may be—simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public,” Fletcher wrote. The 7-4 ruling upheld California’s broad restrictions on concealed-carry use in their entirety. This opinion is limited to only the 9th district insofar as it only effects California and Hawaii, as the other states in the district don't have a "good cause" policy or they already allow for concealed carry without a permit. How will this effect other Circuit Districts and ultimately, if it were ever to reach SCOTUS, effect the debate of concealed carry nationwide? What we do know is that we have a civil right to posses and openly carry weapons within the confines of our states regulations and to carry any way we choose within the confines of our own personal property. We know that the ability to own or posses a weapon is nothing more than a civil right, it is in no possible way an "unalienable right" as some "advocate".