I don't always agree with your conclusions, but I respect your analysis.
On this point, though, I have to point something out: Texas law, PC 46.02, criminalizes all carry of a handgun on or about one's person, then makes some exceptions, as you know.
Simply stating that there is no law specifically criminalizing open carry could give people the wrong idea.
I agree with you that 46.02 is in violation of the Constitution of 1876. The courts, sadly, do not agree.
__________________
KB - your reservations about my OPINION on the subject are warranted, and should be duly noted. Obviously nothing that I offer up should be relied upon by anyone else. I only offer up such "outside the box" observations to stimulate some thought.
I believe we have kind of conditioned ourselves to thinking "inside the box" a bit too much.
There are a variety of ways to "conceal" something. There are also a variety of ways to "reveal" something.
My "outside the box" definition of to intentionally CONCEAL anything - is to endeavor to HIDE either its existence, or presence from observation, or knowledge. The intentional DISPLAY of anything, OR THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT of its existence/presence would seem to be the logical antithesis of intentional CONCEALMENT. In other words a person need not intentionally DISPLAY their handgun in order to be guilty of intentional failure to conceal. A person can intentionally fail to conceal by by either announcing, or alluding to its presence.
There is an underlying presumption of the omitted term "concealed" in the offense of (habitual) handgun carry established by 46.02a (Moosani v Texas). Although Moosani lost his appeal, the case offers a sample of case law discussion pertaining to HABITUAL (46.02a) carry of a handgun, and at least ONE non-HABITUAL exception to 46.02a - the 46.15 "traveling" exception.
There is no underlying presumption of, or legal requirement to conceal a holstered handgun under the NON-HABITUAL (CHL NOT REQUIRED) exceptions to 46.02a application listed in 46.15.......HOWEVER.........
Having had my little say on this topic (once again).....
The average LEO in Texas is not going to be an expert on all of the little nuances of Texas law that I just touched upon.
Bottom line I suppose is - The wise Nanny " Ms. Prudence " would advise all to wait until Texas follows Oklahoma's lead and licensed OC/CC becomes the law in Texas in 2013 - rather than relying on LEO's to understand the law regarding 46.15 non-CHL exceptions to 46.02a.