One weird part of that article, while it starts out saying that he was armed and the police wouldn't say with what, it later goes on to describe that the guy was armed with a taser. That sounds like agenda driven reporting, stating someone was armed while burying further down that it wasn't a firearm.
Not saying he didn't deserve to get shot, based on his actions and that he used the taser to attack the BNSF officer, but more a criticism of the article's author. Even I initially thought it meant he had a firearm, until I read the rest of the article.