Right now the entire "gun issue" in the courts is about three remaining issues:
1) Do we have a right to carry ("bear arms") and if so what is the scope? This will get settled soon, likely via the Kachalsky case...we may know more on that as early as tomorrow. My prediction: the Supremes will take it, and decide that we must have SOME right to carry, with permitless open carry the "baseline" unless there is a respectable form of concealed carry available. This is what Heller footnote 9 is all about, and it also matches the 2003 Ohio Supreme Court decision in Klein. We can live with that because open carry will get us concealed carry in rapid fashion.
2) What rights do we have to own particular guns? "AW" issues, mag capacity, calibers, etc. I consider this of secondary importance after carry, because if necessary we can carry well enough with revolvers, 1911 and various mouseguns.
3) "Who can carry" will mainly revolve around age limits (21 vs. 18) and issues relating to reformed criminals of various types.
4) "Where we carry" runs into that "sensitive places" language Scalia stuck in there. It's a problem. Best solution will be to say "if you're serious, you've got metal detectors up otherwise it's NOT all that sensitive".