Kronic ban leaves retailers' profits up in smoke

26 Oct 2011 11:08p.m.

tim wrote:

Sue my dearest. you seem like you've given a typical, uneducated (on the subject) opinion. no child has been smoking kronic. it was R18, just like tobacco, just like alcohol. the only way a child could have smoked it, was if a parent allowed them to. just like tobacco, just like alcohol. the children had more chance of drinking some methelated spirits than smoking kronic. dear god. hysteria ruins everything.

18 Oct 2011 07:44p.m.

sun7` wrote:

Forget about all kind of lost and win stuff and just think for cannabis and marijuana highs and buy drugs for that from given below site name please go on <a href="http://www.legal-highs.co.za/" target="_blank">legal-highs !!!!

08 Aug 2011 02:39a.m.

jan.. wrote:

Luke, the KNONIKS are made out of chemicals and it can harm you if you over boost yourself.. What is the government plan for the knonik users?.. Is the government sending all the KNONIKS users to the drugs rehabs? or to the prison rehabs?.. The answer to the above is to legalized marijuana plant per users household knowing its your own clean healthy growth that will help keep New Zealand clean and the saving of our tax payers money to help finace the country..

05 Aug 2011 08:41a.m.

blueman wrote:

this is all a waste of money passing these laws. just think of all synthetic cannabis users which are now going to go back to buying illegal drugs from local tinnie houses. I know plenty of people who will be. nice move government!

04 Aug 2011 02:55p.m.

G. Clarke wrote:

I smoke legal highs now and again and to be honest would rather do that in the comfort of my own home than go out on the town, get blind drunk and be at a higher risk of getting hurt. Not by my own doing but by other people out there more intoxicated than me. All of you people that are completely against these legal highs better be against alcohol, cigarettes and a whole lot of other substances that our out there can cause more harm than legal highs or even the real deal. If you are not against all these other toxins, because that is what they all are at the end of the day, than you are all a bunch of hypocrites. Where has freedom of choice gone? it is the soul right of the consumer to know what they are taking and take what ever it is in moderation and don’t give me" You don’t know what is in it" DO you really know exactly what is in a cigarette? Or the booze you are drinking, yes you know the majority of ingredience but the secrets are never fully divulged now are they. It shouldn’t be sold in dairies, Alcohol shouldn’t be sold in dairies, and you should have to purchase legal highs from a proper retailer like a tobacconist or a liquor store. I support National and Key but I think they are going a bit too far with this one in taking away peoples freedom to choose. Hell, everything is bad for you these days and life is not getting any less stressful. Let us have our release, our relaxation, our escape.

04 Aug 2011 02:36p.m.

ChrisKaay wrote:

First of all, I think it's unfair to judge people on their spelling and grammar in a comment, by then associating this with any stereotype of what a "drug user" might be, of synthetic cannabis or otherwise. I am a 19 year old female, a student, a working NZ citizen, and someone who has tried both real cannabis and synthetic products, such as Kronic. That does not mean I am high while writing this. I think the biggest thing to realize is that cannabis and drugs like Kronic will always be around, whether we like it or not. Personally, I believe that banning Kronic will, like many others have pointed out, bring people back to buying weed illegally. Trying to obtain weed, and its effects once consumed, are far more dangerous than synthetic cannabis which has ingridients and warnings clearly listed on the packaging. With this said, safety regulations do need to be improved. But at the end of the day? Weed will always be around. Why not just make those who choose to use it as safe as possible. If you don't wish to partake, that is your choice.

03 Aug 2011 10:27a.m.

Rachael wrote:

what amuses me most is the fact that instead of actually saying ok people smoke weed its all good we understand each to their own...then they come out with the legal drug yes which made shop owners and suppliers happy and not the gangs hahahhahahaha ok so whats the difference here?

02 Aug 2011 11:13p.m.

Grin wrote:

I would hardly call the ban on synthetic cannabis 'Drug Policy', rather 'Synthetic Cannabis Policy', as the legal drug industry (alcohol predominantly, caffiene to a lesser extent) seems exempt from any meaningful definition of 'safe'. It is highly unlikely that synthetic cannabis will be proven to be more harmful than cannabis to the extent that it would overtake alcohol as arguably the worst drug overall for harm to self and others individually as reported in the Lancet Medical Journal last year. I believe if the side effects of caffeine (let alone alcohol) were as sensationally reported as were the reported effects synthetic cannabis, certain vocal sections of the community would decry its use, legality and availablity until they discovered it was probably their recreational stimulant ohoice. Yes, caffeine can induce psychosis and is thought to be a major contributor to seizures amongst other side effects similar to those reported in synthetic cannabis.

02 Aug 2011 09:07p.m.

katrina wrote:

Luke, if you think that it hasn't done you any harm, I suggest you read what you have written once you have come down off the high you are on. Your writing is fast pace, full of spelling and grammar errors and I don't think it features a full stop which indicates a pause for thought.

02 Aug 2011 07:13p.m.

bukster wrote:

I got my stock up supply. Easily enough to last twelve months. However, I would like to see research on safety. ESR's initial tests called these substances, 'low risk'. Non toxic and does not seem to do any damage. Hopefully after twelve months these products will be proven safe and back on the shelves. It won't be an election year so politicians might not be so keen to hit the 'banned' button (but may well reach for it anyway).