An attempted carjacker is deceased after trying to target an Amazon driver in Cleveland, Ohio. The incident, which occurred on Saturday, raises questions about companies prohibiting their drivers from carrying firearms while performing their duties.

The shooting occurred after the individual, later identified as 17-year-old Alquin Wells, approached the driver just after 4 p.m.

A spokesperson from the Cleveland Division of Police confirmed the incident to 3News. According to a media release, the shooting took place at approximately 4:05 p.m. near the intersection of West 48th Street and Franklin Boulevard.

An initial investigation showed that the Amazon driver was working in the area when they were approached by the suspect. The suspect attempted to take the worker’s vehicle at gunpoint.

At some point during the altercation, the suspect was shot by the worker. The suspect tried to drive away in the worker’s vehicle after sustaining the gunshot wound, but crashed the vehicle shortly after driving away.

The reports do not specify whether the Amazon driver had a firearm that he used on the carjacker or whether he was able to wrestle the assailant’s firearm away from him before shooting. However, the incident shows that Amazon’s decision to bar its drivers from being armed, given the nature of their jobs, should be questioned.

Indeed, other Amazon drivers have been victimized while carrying out their duties. In February, an Amazon delivery driver in Washington was gunned down while delivering packages.

Sergey Kubay, 50, was an Amazon Flex driver. He had been for at least four years when he was found on Thursday, January 25, shot in his car that doubled as a part-time package delivery vehicle. His brother says Amazon needs to give full protection to part-time drivers like Sergey.

Sergey’s wife is also a package delivery driver and now she fears she could share the same fate as her husband. The couple used the money from Amazon to take care of their kids, but they’re now left wondering who’s taking care of Flex drivers, who often end up making deliveries late into the night.

“I would like to ask Amazon to step in, not just for Sergey, but step in for all drivers,” Kubay said.

Other delivery services also prohibit their drivers from being armed while on duty, an issue that has raised debate about these rules. However, some have decided to carry firearms despite the prohibition. In August 2023, a rideshare driver used his firearm to defend himself from a would-be robber.

Both Uber and Lyft, the two preeminent rideshare apps, do not allow drivers or riders to carry firearms to protect themselves. While they allow non-lethal weapons, they have barred guns for people using their services. Fortunately, there are some who do not adhere to these rules. A recent story out of Chicago illustrates why these individuals are most in need of firearms:

The 26-year-old driver had dropped off a passenger about 1 a.m. in the 1500 block of South Millard Avenue when two people – a man, 20, and an 18-year-old woman – walked up to him and announced a robbery, according to Chicago police.

The male suspect took the victim’s cell phone, then fired shots as the two robbers tried to flee the scene, police said.

The driver, who has a valid concealed carry license, returned fire, striking the man in the leg and grazing the woman in the arm, police said. The driver was not injured.

The bottom line is that these companies should not be preventing their workers from having the means to defend themselves while they are out on the streets making deliveries. These jobs tend to be more dangerous than positions that do not require travel. These workers are often vulnerable to bad actors seeking to steal their vehicles or packages.

Unfortunately, companies like Amazon, Uber, and Lyft would prefer to leave their workers susceptible to criminal activity. It is likely that these rules are an effort to limit liability in the possibility that a driver hurts someone else with their weapon.

However, the reality of gun control is not only applicable to the government. If a worker wants to use their firearm to hurt someone while on the clock, the rules aren’t going to stop them. If someone is too dangerous to carry a gun while they are delivering packages, then they are probably too dangerous to hire in the first place.