Have to agree with bajo. He is *not* - from anything I read - *blaming* the victim, he called him an idiot. Which is not far from the truth. Unless you are a pro and willing to take your life in your own hands, the advice everyone on the world gives you is the same: turn over your stuff, your life is worth more.
He referenced a case (which he spoke about at length in another thread) where he was himself robbed, and freely accepted the blame for having gotten himself into a dangerous situation. Not for the robbery.
Is the robber to blame for robbing, irrespective of the country's systemic problems, societal corruption, and his horoscope? Yes. Is the poverty and lawlessness to blame, irrespective of this particular motochorro's circumstances, for the general insecurity? Yes that too. Should a person being robbed at gunpoint take the likeliest route to not be harmed physically? That is true as well. These things are not mutually exclusive.
EDIT: You want to make the case that the right and honorable thing is to stay and fight? And, for that matter, to go around dangerous parts of town in highly non-local style, inviting that fight? I will disagree with you, vehemently, but certainly you can argue that. But all bajo is doing is putting in blunt terms his opinion that you shouldn't do that. Not blaming the victim for a robbery.