So I've figured out what wasn't quite right in that last sentence. What bothers me about the tazing has nothing to do with free speech. As they say, "Freedom of the press does not mean freedom of *my* press". If he'd co-operated, he'd have been removed from that venue - but that's not the same as preventing free speech.
What bothers me is that, at the time he was apparently tased, he was on the ground, with two (three?) police officers on top of him.
If he was violent, threatening police, attempting to escape - I can understand why a taser would be considered in those circumstances. Given the circumstances under which he was tased though, I don't think it was justified.
Hrm. It's scary how easy it is to find videos of inappropriate taserings, even when you're barely looking.
"Stand up or you'll get tased again". *sigh*
So what's my point? None, really, just clarifying what disturbed me. It's nothing to do with free speech, and everything to do with abuse of power by poorly trained and/or power-hungry thugs in uniform.
Not that I'm saying that all police are thugs in uniforms, just the ones who tase people who aren't a threat to them.