MSD

I would take the word of a man who reacted to a gun being pulled on him. Even if the robber was on the ground, I would not fault Honeycutt for shooting him if he was still able to fire. I would rather se a mess of a dead attacker in front of me than someone who was probably crippled, but still potentially able to attack me. The fact that there was no bullet in the chamber is irrelevant. At an outside observation point from which the presence of a bullet in the chamber cannot be confirmed or denied, the only safe assumption is that it is loaded and therefore dangerous. I call this theory "Schröedinger's Glock"

...even if he's holding your family hostage.

Here's my analysis of the situation. A man was hired for at-will employment, subject to certain terms and conditions. If he was unwilling to meet those terms and conditions, he should have left the job and found a company to work for who would allow him to carry a legitimate, licensed defensive weapon. While I disagree with the company's decision to prohibit delivery personnel from carrying defensive weapons into high-crime areas, I cannot fault them for terminating an employee for violating the terms of his legally binding contract on which he placed his signature upon being hired.