Monique Bastos
credit: the telegraph.uk
In the just deserts department, we have this gem from Brazil, via The Telegraph:
A Brazilian street robber ended up pleading for mercy from the woman he tried to hold up – after she took him down in a jiu-jitsu move then held him in a leg grip until the police arrived.
Footage emerged of the sobbing man Wesley Sousa de Araujo screaming, crying for his ‘daddy’ and pleading for someone to call the police as Monique Bastos locked his neck in a triangle choke.
Araujo and another man had earlier approached Ms Bastos and another woman on a street in Acailandia, western Brazil – unaware that his would-be victim was a professional MMA fighter and jiu-jitsu blue belt.
Oh, this one is just too good. By all means, take the link and watch the brief video where the big, bad robber who thought he could beat up on a girl, squeals like a frightened piglet. The squealing is in Portuguese, but the entirely less-than-manly tone is unmistakable.
credit: thetelegraph.uk
Ms Bastos, who has six professional MMA fights on her record, pounced after the men cornered the women on a motorbike and demanded they hand over their mobile phones.
The fighter, 23, later told how she took Araujo to ground in a ‘rear-naked choke’ before locking him in a ‘triangle choke’ for 20 minutes until police arrived.
Ms Bastos told Brazil’s iG website: ‘One of the guys grabbed the mobile phone I was carrying. I could see that they were not armed so I knocked their motorbike down.
That’s when she opened an industrial sized can of emasculation:
I wasn’t afraid. I knew I could immobilise them. One of them managed to run away, so I got the motorbike driver with a ‘lion killer’ and held him in my legs for 20 minutes.
See for yourself. I’m surprised animal rights activists aren’t complaining about this and linking it to Cecil the Lion.
In the video filmed on an onlooker’s mobile phone, Arauju is heard screaming out for help as Ms Bastos holds him in the lock and applies pressure on his neck.
He shouts: ‘Daddy, daddy, call the police, daddy. Help Jesus. I swear, it was the first time I’ve ever done this. Help, Lord, somebody help me. Where’s my mum?
Notice that it took the police at least 20 minutes to get there. This incident had a delightfully ironic outcome, but the lesson is clear and as unmistakable as the idiotic bad guy’s plaintive, pathetic whining: when criminals attack, we are very much on our own. The police are not going to be there for a very long time, which will, under the circumstances, seem even longer. Even Ms. Bastos realized that if the two attackers had been armed, she could very well have been in trouble
I’m not blaming the police in Brazil or America. There are always few of them, more criminals, and far more of us. The police can’t be everywhere, and crooks do their best never to commit crimes when the police are around, which brings us back to the point: when criminals attack, we’re on our own. Few of us can train to Ms. Bastos’s level of skill, and women are, by nature, more vulnerable than men.
Now, more than ever, it’s more than just a good idea to exercise our rights under the Second Amendment. Not only may it save our lives and the lives of innumerable citizens a criminal might attack in the future, the mere act of owning guns and carrying concealed weapons horrifies and annoys leftists for whom the Second Amendment and the rule of law are like holy water to a vampire, and that’s a very good thing in itself.
Stately McDaniel Manor 
Hillary would have her half-dozen body guards (all men) take care of that guy. But the Brazilian Lass is a more cost-effective do it yourself kind.
It’s very rude for Mike to interrupt the Democrat Narrative in this way, don’t you think? (LOL-LOL-LOL)
Mike,
Contact an English teacher! Deserts or “desserts”.
Just kidding, love your column.
Dear Mikey:
Thanks! Actually, “just deserts” is, strictly, correct, however “just desserts” has become commonly accepted, particularly in American English.
‘Murica!
That was cruel. I know he’s a robber (or just alleged, I don’t know), but he was already subdued and surrounded, and she kept torturing him, smiling at his pain and humiliation FOR 20 MINUTES. And it wasn’t just the pain and humiliation, which were bad enough, but she was restricting his breathing, threatening his life, while was crying out desperately for help. I had no trouble watching the motorcycle robber get shot dead, but this I didn’t like. I ordinarily have no sympathy for violent criminals (if he actually was), but the way he called out for his father got to me, and he was truly in fear for his life. And someone robbed him while she held him.
Cruel? Maybe, but experience forms people’s opinions over time. My experience: the only time I let the bad guy up, I got pounded and lost all advantage. So if it’s cruel, I’ll still vote for maintaining absolute control until the law arrives. It’s handing over the perp that’s the real reward. And I think bad guys, particularly violent ones, should be put on notice that their rights go out the window the second they start victimizing someone.
I agree, but it just seems like they had him at their mercy, or her mercy, and went overboard. At least she didn’t kill him, which she probably could have done.
Someone robbed him? GOOD. Some truly cosmic justice going on there.
Frankly I don’t care how scared he was. If that’s a problem for him, I suggest that he avoid all criminal action in the future. Or, as J once said “Don’t start nothin’, won’t be nothin’.”
Dear Casey Tompkins:
Like you, I can’t work up much sympathy for the robber. She didn’t really hurt him, though I’m sure his machismo was seriously bruised, and he got off lightly. By keeping him in the hold she employed, she avoided having to seriously injure him with more damaging strikes and techniques.
No one is responsible for his embarrassment and his predicament but him and his idiot friend that got away, hopefully not for long.
@ Char CHar Banks: Granted, people (humans) tend to over react and can thereby indulge in angry, vengeful ways. But that’s human nature. Lets keep in mind that there’s a rule which is seldom followed but never the less prevents such over reactions. The rule is: Never initiate the use of force. This man (and millions of others every day) violated that rule. If he had not initiated a violent action against those young women, he’d never have suffered as he did at the hands of one of those women.
A corollary rule also applies: Never appear to be about to initiate the use of force. Which simply means that even intimidating behavior is solid grounds for preparatory defensive actions.
Notice that this rule does not apply to use of force in defense. Under common law and case law: the defender is always held innocent of criminal action. This isn’t in our constitution but should be – that way, every American would be more aware of the principle and more likely to heed it.