By Ammoland Editors & Staff AmmoLand
TRAVERSE CITY, MI – A years-long legal battle between a retired nurse and a former county commissioner has come to an end after Grand Traverse County agreed to settle a lawsuit for $100,000. The lawsuit stems from a 2021 Zoom meeting where then-Commissioner Ron Clous briefly displayed a rifle on camera—an act that was never criminally charged but stirred national anti-gun media-manufactured outrage and allegations of political intimidation.
During the January 20, 2021 virtual public meeting—held at the height of COVID-era restrictions—Patricia “Keli” MacIntosh used her public comment time to urge the board to condemn anti-government extremist groups like the Proud Boys. In response, Clous stepped away from his webcam, returned with a rifle, and sat silently while holding it.
That brief moment ignited a breathless media firestorm, with numerous outlets framing the incident as an act of aggression or intimidation.
However, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel declined to press charges, acknowledging that while Clous’ actions may have been “irresponsible,” they were not illegal.
Clous, who no longer sits on the board, has since apologized in a formal letter, stating:
“While not my intent, I understand that my actions in getting my rifle could reasonably have caused you to feel uncomfortable or intimidated, and for that, I apologize.”
Despite the apology and lack of criminal charges, MacIntosh pursued a civil lawsuit claiming her First Amendment rights were chilled. Four years later, the settlement was finalized with insurance funds, not taxpayer dollars, covering the cost. According to MacIntosh’s attorney, much of the money will go toward legal fees, with the remainder possibly going toward a scholarship fund.
Critics of the lawsuit view the entire episode as political theater blown out of proportion. Commissioner Darryl Nelson, who continues to serve on the board, called it a “nuisance lawsuit” and said Clous’ act “was a mistake, not intimidation.” He added, “Settling the case with insurance was the prudent choice.”
Clous was not acting aggressively, brandishing the rifle, or making any threats. In the eyes of many local residents, the rifle—seen for mere seconds—was more of a clumsy political statement than anything else. In fact, Clous had previously supported a resolution that declared Grand Traverse County a “Second Amendment sanctuary,” which passed with a 4-2 vote and drew support from gun rights groups and local citizens alike.
Commission Chair Scott Sieffert also weighed in, saying, “While I personally hold the First, as well as Second, Amendments to be absolute, it is time to put this behind us and focus on governing, not past shenanigans.”
The broader context of the lawsuit—coming just weeks after the Capitol events of January 6, 2021—clearly influenced media coverage and public perception. But to many Second Amendment supporters, this case reflects a troubling pattern: where merely owning or displaying a firearm—even legally and non-threateningly—can be distorted by the press into something nefarious.
At the end of the day, the rifle never left Clous’ home, never pointed at anyone, and no one was harmed. But the lawsuit sent a message: speech involving firearms, even silent visual statements, can be grounds for years of litigation depending on the political climate.
Editor’s Note: No criminal charges were ever filed. Clous’ apology, while sincere, did not admit to any legal wrongdoing. The settlement avoids further litigation and allows all parties to move on. The insurance carrier, not the county taxpayers, covered the $100,000 payout.
Find this article on AmmoLand.
READ NEXT: New Military Policy Raises Tough Questions In DC
The question is the settlement went to what winner? Who won the lawsuit and what was the settlement for. The article completely ignores the most glaring information related to the headline.