I remember seeing a YT video of a cop just losing it at this guy.  Their jurisdiction had a "duty to inform" law and the guy never informed the cop that he had a concealed gun and a CCW license.  I can't recall as to why the cop stopped the guy (traffic stop) but a few minutes went by then the cop noticed he had a gun under his shirt.

Cop, on discovering he was printing, went ballistic and arrested him while the guys wife was going nuts and yelling why is he being arrested.

My question is, in those jurisdictions is it mandatory for cops to ask people if they have a concealed weapon when doing routine traffic stops or similar interactions.

Nope.  No reason for Cops to ask everyone they pull over for a traffic stop if they are carrying as soon as they interact.  If the Cop has them exit the car, of if the Cops want to do a consensual search, THEN they might ask if there are drugs, weapons or large amounts of money in the vehicle.

There are some good videos of how to properly inform a Cop you're carrying.  Blurting out, "I have a gun," isn't recommended.

The method I like is to carry an ID wallet that has your drivers license in one window and your carry permit displayed in the other.  Once you present your license, the Cop will likely ask if you're carrying your firearm.  He'll then calmly ask you to avoid reaching toward your waist unless he asks you to.

This is in Atlanta.

These people are law-abiding citizens who want to exercise their right to bear arms to defend themselves and their loved ones. 

Anyone, let us know from the law class portion of CCW training.

Can you legally protect loved ones or anyone but yourself with deadly force outside the home in Hawaii ?
I thought it was a duty to call the police but could be wrong. (Under the law)

I’m not even sure you can protect innocents outside the home with a firearm. Only yourself.
I could be wrong but this is a messed up State with a web of tangled laws.
I am NOT a lawyer.

Just watch how you word it I guess before you shut your mouth and wait for your attorney.

Can you legally protect loved ones or anyone but yourself with deadly force outside the home in Hawaii ?
I thought it was a duty to call the police but could be wrong. (Under the law)

I know I will protect myself or a loved one, which includes my dogs, with deadly force if I feel life or bodily harm is about to take place. I will do this at any time and any place with whatever weapon I have at my disposal.  I will take care about the legal ramifications later.  I will be 73 is 4.5 months and the older I get the less I worry about what happens after the event.  Of course I hope I am never put in such a situation, but if I am, in my mind, my actions are fully justified.

I know I will protect myself or a loved one, which includes my dogs, with deadly force if I feel life or bodily harm is about to take place. I will do this at any time and any place with whatever weapon I have at my disposal.  I will take care about the legal ramifications later.  I will be 73 is 4.5 months and the older I get the less I worry about what happens after the event.  Of course I hope I am never put in such a situation, but if I am, in my mind, my actions are fully justified.

I'm a little younger than you,  but not much.
I have the same attitude. Generally speaking it isn't people like us that get hurt.
"The good they die young".  Shoot shovel, and shut up.
 

please show me where his words were "open carrying"

You missed my point.

The Chief's words were "Open Carrying" as it relates to having 911 called.  That's not the same as failing to conceal a firearm completely while concealed carrying.

Words mean things.  You can't claim someone is open carrying just because the gun was unintentionally 'unconcealed.'

Anyone, let us know from the law class portion of CCW training.

Can you legally protect loved ones or anyone but yourself with deadly force outside the home in Hawaii ?
I thought it was a duty to call the police but could be wrong. (Under the law)

I’m not even sure you can protect innocents outside the home with a firearm. Only yourself.
I could be wrong but this is a messed up State with a web of tangled laws.
I am NOT a lawyer.

Just watch how you word it I guess before you shut your mouth and wait for your attorney.

Disclaimer: IANAL.  I do not give legal advice.

As I understand it, according to HRS 703-305 (Use of force for the protection of other persons), you may use force to defend a third person.  The basic test is “if I were that person, would I be justified in using force to defend myself?” based on the criteria in HRS 703-304 (Use of force in self-protection).

Unless you’re 100% sure of what you’re getting into, though, using force (especially deadly force) in defense of a third person is fraught with peril.

I’ll throw in a plug here for Andrew Branca’s “Law of Self-Defense” book.  Amazing resource when it comes to using force to defend yourself or someone else.

The Law of Self Defense: The Indispensable Guide to the Armed Citizen https://a.co/d/h3DqG24

please show me where his words were "open carrying"

The whole situation is dangerously unclear at this point.  “Concealed” and “unconcealed” are referenced in the law (HRS 134-9, “Licenses to carry”), but neither term is defined in the law.

The Rules of the Chief of Police define both; “concealed” means your firearm is hidden well enough that somebody without law enforcement training can’t spot that you’re carrying.  “Unconcealed” means “not concealed.”  If somebody spots your pew, even if you’re just printing, that’s “unconcealed” and grounds for revocation of your license(s).

Worse, they could reasonably charge you with a violation of 134-25 (Place to keep pistol or revolver) and/or 134-26 (Carrying or possessing a loaded firearm on a public highway), both of which are class B felonies. 

Incidentally, Hawaii law defines a public highway as “All roads, highways, alleys, streets, ways, lanes, bikeways, bridges, and all other real property highway related interests in the State, opened, laid out, subdivided, consolidated, and acquired and built by the government are declared to be public highways.”  That’s pretty much every roadway on the island, to include surface streets.  I know because I got a ticket once for an “abandoned vehicle” on a “public highway” for having my car parked in front of my house for more than 24 hours without moving it.

The whole situation is dangerously unclear at this point. 

Amen to that.

All you future CCW holders.  Be careful.  Stay safe.

Anyone, let us know from the law class portion of CCW training.

Can you legally protect loved ones or anyone but yourself with deadly force outside the home in Hawaii ?
I thought it was a duty to call the police but could be wrong. (Under the law)

I’m not even sure you can protect innocents outside the home with a firearm. Only yourself.
I could be wrong but this is a messed up State with a web of tangled laws.
I am NOT a lawyer.

Just watch how you word it I guess before you shut your mouth and wait for your attorney.

Disclaimer
#IamNotaLibrarian but will embolden what I consider pertinent details IMHO otf the "fine print" of  703-305 and ad a little more clarity to the other answer.

§703-305  Use of force for the protection of other persons.  (1)  Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 703-310,  the use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable to protect a third person when:
     (a)  Under the circumstances as the actor believes them to be, the person whom the actor seeks to protect would be justified in using such protective force; (death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, rape, or forcible sodomy.)
and
     (b)  The actor believes that the actor’s intervention is necessary for the protection of the other person.
     
(2)  Notwithstanding subsection (1):
     (a)  When the actor would be obliged under section 703-304 to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing, or to comply with a demand before using force in self-protection, the actor is not obliged to do so before using force for the protection of another person, unless the actor knows that the actor can thereby secure the complete safety of such other person;
     (b)  When the person whom the actor seeks to protect would be obliged under section 703-304 to retreat,  to surrender the possession of a thing or to comply with a demand if the person knew that the person could obtain complete safety by so doing, the actor is obliged to try to cause the person to do so before using force in the person’s protection if the actor knows that the actor can obtain the other’s complete safety in that way; and
     (c)  Neither the actor nor the person whom the actor seeks to protect is obliged to retreat when in the other’s dwelling or place of work to any greater extent than in the actor’s or the person’s own.


     §703-310  Provisions generally applicable to justification.  (1)  When the actor believes that the use of force upon or toward the person of another is necessary for any of the purposes for which such belief would establish a justification under sections 703-303 to 703-309 but the actor is reckless or negligent in having such belief or in acquiring or failing to acquire any knowledge or belief which is material to the justifiability of the actor’s use of force, the justification afforded by those sections is unavailable in a prosecution for an offense for which recklessness or negligence, as the case may be, suffices to establish culpability.

     (2)  When the actor is justified under sections 703-303 to 703-309 in using force upon or toward the person of another but the actor recklessly or negligently injures or creates a risk of injury to innocent persons, the justification afforded by those sections is unavailable in a prosecution for such recklessness or negligence toward innocent persons.

 

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

I know I will protect myself or a loved one, which includes my dogs, with deadly force if I feel life or bodily harm is about to take place. I will do this at any time and any place with whatever weapon I have at my disposal.  I will take care about the legal ramifications later.  I will be 73 is 4.5 months and the older I get the less I worry about what happens after the event.  Of course I hope I am never put in such a situation, but if I am, in my mind, my actions are fully justified.

The older you get, the less a life sentence is a deterrent.

seems a reasonable thing to do.

It is the safe answer. Rather than having the public confront someone whose firearm peeks out from under their shirt, call the police and they can investigate.

I will be 73 is 4.5 months and the older I get the less I worry about what happens after the event.  Of course I hope I am never put in such a situation, but if I am, in my mind, my actions are fully justified.

I'll have to find the shirt and send you one. It said " The older I get the less of a deterrent life in prison is"

I'll have to find the shirt and send you one. It said " The older I get the less of a deterrent life in prison is"

I think the quote paraphrased is this
"never pick a fight with an old man, he'll just kill you and leave you in a ditch".
Hawaii police chiefs have picked a fight.