The personal thoughts and comments of Gene, "The Aggie."

Use any information found here at your own risk. I am not responsible for the consequences of your use, misuse or abuse, of this information. I do not advocate or condone violence except for lawful protection of life, liberty and, in very limited cases, property. Nothing included in this site is to be taken as legal advice.


NOTE:
"The Aggie" neither controls or
endorses the sites that Google displays in this ad bar.

'Gun-Free Zones' are only gun-free, until somebody brings a gun. - Unknown

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Arrest made in death of mother

Ms. Davila committed the "sin" of defending her infant's life. For that she was butchered by an illegal alien. I'm sorry folks, I know "immigrant" is preferrable to "alien". He did not "immigrate", he illegally crossed the border. He doesn't belong here! He could have crossed the border legally if he'd wanted to. Oh, I forgot, he's a criminal. He can't legally cross. So I guess we have to accept his presence anyway?

Several things stand out, to me:
  • Ms. Tina Davila, according to my understanding, followed the "official" advice of "Give'em what they want and they won't hurt you" until it came to her kid. So much for the so-called wisdom of the "officials." Why do they think appeasement ever worked? It never has and never will. Appeasement just encourages the oppressors, whether individuals or governments. Ask the Brits (ref: Nevil Chamberlain and Adolph Hitler)
  • Ms. Davila evidently did not have, or attempt to deploy, an effective means of defense. Yes, I know, the outcome may not have materially changed. On the other hand, she was helpless with no one else to defend her. WHO is responsible for her personal security? Only the victim.
  • Her remaining family grieves for her I lost my mother, twenty-five years ago, to health problems. I can not imagine my feelings if she had died earlier due to violence.
To have successfully defended herself would have required several things to come together in the proper order and at the right time:
  • She would have had to possess on her person, or within easy reach, some kind of weapon or tactic, pre-planned or improvised on the spot,
  • She would have had to possess the will to use it to maximum effect. In this case, the death of the assailant would have been a better outcome, at least as far as her family might be concerned. I know, his family might not agree. On the other hand, he, and he alone, chose to rob, threaten and murder Ms. Davila. I have no sympathy for the murderer. His family have my sympathy.
  • She would have had to actually deploy that weapon or tactic effectively.
  • Either good luck or God's intervention would have been required, INMNSHO .

The lack of any one, or more, could have failed to materially change the outcome to remain the same. As it is, it seems like she at least lacked "some kind of weapon, or tactic, pre-planned or improvised on the spot" to protect herself. Now, she is no longer available to protect her children. SHE had no choice!

What is your chosen weapon or tactic? Are you willing trust in "luck," or God, to provide for your lack of planning? You carry life/car/home/renter insurance, don't you? By the way, they only pay after loss.

What is your carjacking/mugging prevetion insurance?

Please be safe, whatever your choices are and God Bless Ya'll !

No comments:

Popular Posts