rat

The facts are that the overwhelming majority of businesses/corporations that are in the industries involving cash registers and/or delivery drivers support policies of compliance with any would-be robberies.

Compliance has been statistically correlated with fewer injuries and/or fatalities when it comes to robbery/standoff situations in these places of business. Whether it be a corporately owned gas station, a restaurant, a store, or any other cash-handling business, the numbers of stores supporting compliance far outweigh any that do not.

There are several issues at hand. One, legal duty to maintain and promote the safety of one's employees to the best of the company's abilities. As stated above, there are far fewer injuries and fatalities in situations involving compliance with demands. The company has a duty to its employees to advocate the course that provides them the best chances of survival or safety from harm. Two, there lies a liability to the company if one of its employees uses excessive force in restraining/disarming any would-be robber on its premises or during the execution of the employees work (ie, on a delivery). In many states, homicide self-defense is only legal if lethal force is first used upon the person defending himself, and ONLY if that person has no chance to flee. This duty to flee creates greater issues when there is a driver with an automobile on a delivery. Excessive restraint/force is grounds for both criminal damages and civil suits in America. Simple fact of life. It's the same reason the police can not simply beat you with nightsticks if you tell them you won't exit your automobile after a traffic stop. They can remove you from your car, but not club you unconscious unless you resist to such an extent as to place their safety in danger. Thirdly, if a delivery person were to chase a would-be robber and the robber ditched their weapon, they could even make a case for assault and battery against the driver if the weapon is not found nearby or their are no witnesses. Add to that the possibility of criminal trespass to private property if any chase goes through the property of other homeowners, and now you're staring at even MORE liability.

Last thing I'd like to point out is that even if convicted, the robber could pursue legal damages through civil court, where the statutes of evidence are not "beyond a reasonable doubt" but rather a "preponderence of the evidence"--simply put, if it's better odds than a coin flip that the company's employee(s) overstepped their bounds, the company will probably end up settling out of court for a hefty sum.

__________________