There is a thin line between public speech and disturbing the peace. Resisting an order to leave the premises and fighting back escalates the situation. Do you honestly believe Meyer's rights were abrogated?
I don't believe I ever said his rights were abrogated, I suggested that in the future that others' could or would be because if the powerful don't want to be bothered with pesky questions, all they have to do is have a cop by the mic and if the question or questioner is impertinent then the high sign could be given and the questioner asked to leave or risk tasering.
If we don't stand against possible abrogation and investigate it thoroughly and punish those who may have abrogated then how will we know when actual abrogation occurs?
I can envision being at such an event and asking a question that may fall outside what most in government would deign "normal". I can also envision getting pissy if the person I put the question to decides to ignore the question based on whatever grounds. I can also envision myself refusing to leave the mic till I got a valid answer.
What's at stake is accountability for the elected official. If I'm arrested, there is no accountability.
At what point do I become a peace disturber? The issue is not technically free speech. It is actually about government accountability AND abuse of power (whether on Kerry's part [not so much] and/or the campus cops [very definitely, absolutely, should be in jail, yes]).
If that kid had gone up and tried to take a swing at Kerry, then yeah, he should be removed. If he had gotten in that swing and was going back for more then he might have then deserved to be tasered. I never saw the kid do anything that deserved tasering. That was police brutality. There were between 4 and 6 cops there. If they can't take him out of the room then there's a problem. The tasering was pure ego and control issues. They wanted him to cower and STFU immediately. We, as citizens, don't have to do everything they say no matter what.