I thought most banks' policy is 'give 'em the money no matter what'?

Maybe she ws afraid he'd send her a bullet in the little vacuum capsule.

Inside job of course. It does remind me of the video shown frequently of the gun toting robber at a convenience store demanding money from the clerk behind the bullet proof glass. The clerk told him to take a hike and the robber stuck his gun under the glass through the cash receiving opening. He was not able to manuver the gun through this tiny opening and the clerk just calmly grabbed the gun out of his hand.

After thirty years of the media saying "Give the crook the money, its not worth your life" and demonizing anyone who stands up to criminality, is it any wonder that the country is populated by spineless wonders?

But if you give him the money, he takes it, and places it in his lap and it explodes --you kill two birds with one stone. He has to go to a hospital for his injuries where he will be easily identifiable (crotch tattooed blue by dye explosion) and he won't be able to procreate.

I'm with laura. When you get these dipshits in jobs that require at least average mental skills, you know they came over from CityWorks or some dropout reclamation program.

The teller doing that job two years ago is at home with her kids thanks to tax cuts and her baby-daddy's raise or else she opened a Krispy Kreme franchise. Welcome to the 21st.

Once again, with feeling;

I like my unemployment rates just a little on the trashy side.
Have you seen the lines at Walmart lately? Only three cashiers on duty. Its a freakin' crime against capitalism.

FWIW, I think "Give the crook the money, its not worth your life" is mostly corporate policy, not a media thing (or at least, not directly.)

And a pretty long-standing typical corporate policy, I learned recently somewhat to my surprise. On the History Channel's "Wild West Tech," they mentioned that the railroad companies' policy about armed robbers was that their security guys shouldn't try to shoot it out, and should just cooperate.

What doesn't surprise me, though, is that the actual guys on the trains almost never *did* obey that policy, and were pretty effective and resourceful when it came to killing train robbers. Professional pride trumping corporate policy....

Professional pride trumping corporate policy....

Yeah, that and just plain outrage that somone would try to do something so wrong and an unwillingness to let them get away with it.

God knows we need some of that today!

lauraw, you don't have to send the bullet in the cannister, you just point the gun up into the tube and start blastin!!

yeah.

I'm reminded of a joke.

A blonde decides to go into kidnapping and goes to a local playground. She beckons over a young boy, pins a note on his jumper that says, "If you want to see your son again, send him to the playground tomorrow with $5000 in this envelope," and sends him home.

The next day she returns to the playground and finds the boy there with -- wonder of wonders! -- $5000 and a note from his mother. The note says only, "How could you do this to a fellow blonde?"

When you get her home, how do you quickly get into a blondes pants?

Pick them up off the floor.

I was once a banker, I'm now a banking regulator. From day 1 tellers are trained to comply with any instructions given by a robber. As a regulator, I'd be duty-bound to criticize a bank that did not enshrine this concept in its security policy. The teller was merely doing as she'd been instructed many times.

At a bank where I once worked, there was an incident where a teller's best friend came to her teller station and handed over a robbery note as a joke. The teller duly ponied up the cash and triggered the cameras; it took quite some time before bank management and the FBI (bank robbery is an automatic Federal crime) accepted that the whole thing was a joke that spectacularly backfired.

From the banks' (and regulators') viewpoint, insurance policies can replace the cash; no robbery is worth the life of a teller or an innocent bystander. The prime concern is the liability claims of innocent bystanders killed/wounded when the robber doesn't get his way.

This reminds me about Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, and how Saddam's troops seized Kuwaiti banks and were frantically searching around inside for all the loot that the Kuwaitis were known to have.

Most of what's inside a bank these days is electrons. There's not enough actual cash in most banks to be more than chump change -- certainly not in teller drawers. There's probably more cash in the local market's change drawers than at a teller station.