You are missing the point with your strawman use of "capital crime". As if police are only authorized to use physical force when somebody is suspected of a capital crime.
How is "not following simple commands" a problematic behaviour? Was this individual a sworn subordinate of the person issuing the "simple commands"?
Police have a right to detain people, particularly in traffic situations and also when there is suspicion of a crime. In this case we had both. Keenan caused a traffic accident, and was suspected of DUI and of attempted grand theft auto.
Why you think somebody like that should not be required to follow instructions by police is baffling to me.
I won't follow simple commands from people. Because I am a free man.
This is more "sovereign citizen" than "a free man". Free people are still subject to laws. If you cause an accident, you have to deal with police. If you are suspected of DUI or attempted car theft, you have to deal with police. And you have to follow their lawful instructions. That is not optional. Otherwise, you have anarchy.
A society in which police are permitted to commit violence against citizens for "not following simple commands" is a totalitarian police state.
In a civilized society police may exercise physical force subject to relevant laws. That includes use of force to effect an arrest.
Yet, you seem to casually imagine that this is a just, reasonable, and expected way for police to behave.
Yes, I expect police to use physical force to arrest a suspect who is resisting arrest or attempting to flee.
I do not expect police to just let such people go. What you envision is a criminals' paradise. Do all the crimes you want, but police can't touch you. In a Bilbiean Utopia, everybody would be the bad guy from Lethal Weapon II.
That's a deep and serious flaw in your character, that cannot be justified by appealing to the irrelevant fact that Australian police carry Tazers.
Why is it irrelevant? It shows that even Australian police may find need to use tasers and other forms of physical force. Are they totalitarian too? Can you, "a free man" in Australia drive up coked up out of your mind, cause an accident, try to steal another car, and then try to flee and resist arrest without police using physical force? Is following lawful orders by police optional in Australia under these circumstances?
Note, your initial claim was that Keenan Anderson should not be required to follow commands by police, even though he caused an accident and was suspected of DUI and attempted grand theft auto.