Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
09-24-2007, 07:14 AM
#53
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Damascus MD
Posts: 2,751
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Arthur P
Germ.... You and nodog need to go back and reread that excerpt, all the way through this time. If you just jump to conclusions the instant you hit TR's name and quit reading, then you miss it.
T.R. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE SUIT. If you'd bothered to read the entire thing, it plainly says right there, in black and white, that he has used the stuff but never purchased any. That prevents him from being a party to this class action suit right there because he has not suffered damages. duh!
Germ.... You and nodog need to go back and reread that excerpt, all the way through this time. If you just jump to conclusions the instant you hit TR's name and quit reading, then you miss it.
T.R. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE SUIT. If you'd bothered to read the entire thing, it plainly says right there, in black and white, that he has used the stuff but never purchased any. That prevents him from being a party to this class action suit right there because he has not suffered damages. duh!
And a Minnesotan -- T.R. Michels, 57, of Burnsville, an outdoor writer, author, hunting guide and frequent hunting seminar speaker who has his own website (www.trmichels.com) -- acknowledges he is responsible for raising much of the stink.
"Hunters have been screwed," he said. "They have been misled. And they [companies] are making tons of money off the stuff."
He said he has no ax to grind and began looking at the clothing because his job as a writer and outdoor expert is to "look into myths and dispell them."
Said Michels: "I was lied to, and that really ticked me off."
He is not involved in the lawsuit, and won't be because, while he has used Scent-Lok clothing, he's never purchased it, he said. However, Michels has questioned the performance of the clothing with the U.S. Patent Office and has posted numerous exchanges he's had with the company on his website and others.
"Hunters have been screwed," he said. "They have been misled. And they [companies] are making tons of money off the stuff."
He said he has no ax to grind and began looking at the clothing because his job as a writer and outdoor expert is to "look into myths and dispell them."
Said Michels: "I was lied to, and that really ticked me off."
He is not involved in the lawsuit, and won't be because, while he has used Scent-Lok clothing, he's never purchased it, he said. However, Michels has questioned the performance of the clothing with the U.S. Patent Office and has posted numerous exchanges he's had with the company on his website and others.
09-24-2007, 07:28 AM
#55
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central Minnesota
Posts: 676
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
That's a big part of it for them GMMAT - the attention. I have no doubt Scent Lok or any other carbon activated clothing can help. But its not the end all. You can strap on your Scent Lok suit and sit in a stand 10 feet off the ground moving around constantly and farting and belching out your egg mcmuffin and expect to see big bucks. Scent Lok, like rubber boots or good camo or a quality treestand is one piece of the puzzle. Now to what degree scent proof clothing works is debatable and so is the fact that "false claims" were made by Scent Lok or any other company. Again, you could say the same for scent companies or call makers or decoy makers etc. They all claim to aid you in your hunting experience as well but they don't always. And a lot of it has to do with how they are all used.
09-24-2007, 07:29 AM
#56
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 434
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I use the stuff and I think it works. It really doesn't cost any more then another brand of hunting clothes so what's the big deal? It's still great clothing and it has a carbon liner that may or may not help you depending on how you take care of the clothing. How can the people suing prove that they took the precautions Scent Lok claims you must do for it to be effective. There isn't a product out there that will cover all human scent fromthe nose of a whitetail deer. If anybody thinks that they haven't spent enough time in the woods to know any better. I use the product but it isn't for everyone. If you don't believe it works don't buy it! It's really that simple.
Darrall
Darrall
09-24-2007, 07:40 AM
#57
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I'd seriously like to see the claim the companies are making (exact claim).....and then see if "damages" could be attributed to the claim being "false".
"Forget the wind....just hunt".........well....what if I do that? What "damages" have I truly incurred if I do that? Let's say the garment has a 1% effective rate of odor captivation capabilities. Has it helped, "some"?
What "damages" have I incurred if I practice an otherwise sound scent-control regimen.....and a deer busts me?
Does the fact that I ate a garlic sandwich on stand come into play? Can you prove that it did/didn't? Can you prove I did/didn't?
This is ludicrous in "my" eyes. I think every person that purchases these garments is taking a chance.....JUST like the guys who purchase the buck growl are taking a chance. it seems that, for the most part, the guys who own these garments are satisfied with their purchases (heck...it's good camo, if nothing else). The ones I see raising the MOST stink don't own it.....don't care to own it.....and the biggest factor to that (that I see cited) is $$.
It's entertaining to watch these events unfold. I own some of it.....and the outcome of these conversations AND this "lawsuit" aren't going to sway me in any way. It's good camo, period. "IF" it has scent control capabilities......that is a "bonus". I took the chance. I sleep fine.
"Forget the wind....just hunt".........well....what if I do that? What "damages" have I truly incurred if I do that? Let's say the garment has a 1% effective rate of odor captivation capabilities. Has it helped, "some"?
What "damages" have I incurred if I practice an otherwise sound scent-control regimen.....and a deer busts me?
Does the fact that I ate a garlic sandwich on stand come into play? Can you prove that it did/didn't? Can you prove I did/didn't?
This is ludicrous in "my" eyes. I think every person that purchases these garments is taking a chance.....JUST like the guys who purchase the buck growl are taking a chance. it seems that, for the most part, the guys who own these garments are satisfied with their purchases (heck...it's good camo, if nothing else). The ones I see raising the MOST stink don't own it.....don't care to own it.....and the biggest factor to that (that I see cited) is $$.
It's entertaining to watch these events unfold. I own some of it.....and the outcome of these conversations AND this "lawsuit" aren't going to sway me in any way. It's good camo, period. "IF" it has scent control capabilities......that is a "bonus". I took the chance. I sleep fine.
09-24-2007, 07:44 AM
#58
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,394
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
GMMAT,
In my opinion, people in general don’t try to cram it down people’s throats that they’ve been duped. It is more of a situation where those that may have been duped don’t seem to want to admit it, and take the words of others to be negative, instead of positive, constructive or helpful. Because admitting that you could have been wrong, could mean that you fall for silly marketing schemes, or can’t get over the testimonials…. Perhaps the people doing the cramming are trying to help.
They do sell carbon in a spray bottle. I think it is like $5 - $8. Rinse the old off and spray on the new, but that is if you think the stuff works. And if you do think that it works, are you okay with the reactivation process of the clothing…
I read up on it, and I think carbon may have some benefit, but look at the price tag. I’m not at all surprised that there is a suit coming and I won’t be surprise if it becomes class action.
KP
In my opinion, people in general don’t try to cram it down people’s throats that they’ve been duped. It is more of a situation where those that may have been duped don’t seem to want to admit it, and take the words of others to be negative, instead of positive, constructive or helpful. Because admitting that you could have been wrong, could mean that you fall for silly marketing schemes, or can’t get over the testimonials…. Perhaps the people doing the cramming are trying to help.
They do sell carbon in a spray bottle. I think it is like $5 - $8. Rinse the old off and spray on the new, but that is if you think the stuff works. And if you do think that it works, are you okay with the reactivation process of the clothing…
I read up on it, and I think carbon may have some benefit, but look at the price tag. I’m not at all surprised that there is a suit coming and I won’t be surprise if it becomes class action.
KP
09-24-2007, 07:46 AM
#60
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,329
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I'm glad they are being sued because it is advertising to the masses that they are lying.
With that said they won't win. The case will be tried above the district court level and the burden of proof will fall on the plaintiff. Neither side can prove it does/doesn't work. So the judge will likely dismiss the case or worse yet for the plaintiff, make no decision at all.
Tom
With that said they won't win. The case will be tried above the district court level and the burden of proof will fall on the plaintiff. Neither side can prove it does/doesn't work. So the judge will likely dismiss the case or worse yet for the plaintiff, make no decision at all.
Tom