I think that's what the crew of AF447 were thinking as well...
From reading the report it looks as though the flying pilot tried to execute a go-round manoeuvre at one point not understanding that the aircraft has insufficient performance at altitude to power out of a stall.
The reason behind focusing on angle of stall in the early theory is to strengthen the mind in relation as to how to recover from a stall and that is to reduce the angle of attack.
You can't really fly an aircraft through all stages of flight with reference to an angle of attack. It does have its place in efficiencies but as soon as you change configuration, gather ice, dirt, dent a wing etc the angles change, including stall angle.
Using speed to reference the basic max weight level stall in ISA gives a speed datum which a well trained pilot can manipulate to find where the minimum place you want to be is. You can then maintain a speed well above that and be safe.
The stall warning is just that and should go off a few knots at least before you stall. Who cares what angle you are at, reduce the attitude and power up to regain some speed ensures you move away from the stall point.
One point to make is that if you get iced up or other form of wing degredation you may stall at an angle and speed prior to stall warning activation.
Another posible reason for the placement of piper switches and pitot is on the opposite side to the cabin doors. Small Pipers are right side doors, left side sensors, PA31 left side doors right side stall sensor. It may have nothing to do with it but this may stop random bending of vanes etc. Also may offset drag caused by handles and probes, switches etc.