You know...

The implication in this makes me want to hurt someone:

I'm going to assume the missing word is "fought".  You can probably guess my feelings on a liberal arts-degreed twerp who cannot even craft a complete sentence even hinting at cowardice in others.

Here is the full article.

Here's the thing.  These dudes weren't armed.  That any of them, in those circumstances, fought back still puts them above your average civilian, given how few of the rest of us fight back in even vaguely similar situations.  (Last time I checked, the number of people who fought back against the Virginia Tech shooter was 0.)

The article itself is much more even-handed.  But I still want to slap whomever decided that was a good idea to put on the front page.