""The best course of action is to co-operate with the robber – it is never worth putting yourself and others at risk in these situations by trying to be a hero," she said."
This is the crux of the argument.
If you believe that cooperating with a robber will not escalate the crime to a more violent level than resisting is a bad idea
If you believe that cooperating with a robber will not prevent escalating of the crime to a violent level then resisting is a good idea
It may sound whacky but if I could "trust" a criminal just to do the original crime I could accept the non-resistance opinion.
However, the news is full of stories of petty criminals just shooting, stabbing, beating up people who were cooperating. It all comes down to what was the motivation for the crime
I fear that many crimes are not motivated by a desire for efficient easy money but for a sense of control and what better way to demonstrate your "control" over a stranger then by hurting them.
Personally, if I feel I have a good chance I will resist. Now if I am totally out gunned then I have to take my chances. But in today's violent society, I feel that "trusting" the criminal to only rob you and not hurt you is folly
