B.C. wants to decriminalize

[Bsuds]

Exactly. It would take some pressure off of an overloaded justice and correctional system for what are basically petty offenses. This would free up resources to be used for actual addiction treatment if only the political will existed. Addiction, like mental health issues, are things we find it very easy to avert our gaze from, making them an easy target for cuts and cancellations.

[my5cents]

If the decriminalization is similar to Portugal's, as I understand it any drugs in an amount for personal use would be confiscated - and there would be escalating non-criminal consequences for subsequent incidents of possession for personal use. Persons with drugs in an amount for dealing would face criminal prosecution.

Exactly. It would take some pressure off of an overloaded justice and correctional system for what are basically petty offenses. This would free up resources to be used for actual addiction treatment if only the political will existed. Addiction, like mental health issues, are things we find it very easy to avert our gaze from, making them an easy target for cuts and cancellations.

It was reported that the intended policy was to allow the person found in possession to keep the drug and just provide them with drug abuse literature to encourage them to get help.

Much of the Lower Mainland already doesn't charge for small amounts already, (I doubt they allow them to retain the drug though) so the talk of "pressure off the overloaded justice and correctional system" is without merit.

[rustled]

Exactly. It would take some pressure off of an overloaded justice and correctional system for what are basically petty offenses. This would free up resources to be used for actual addiction treatment if only the political will existed. Addiction, like mental health issues, are things we find it very easy to avert our gaze from, making them an easy target for cuts and cancellations.

It was reported that the intended policy was to allow the person found in possession to keep the drug and just provide them with drug abuse literature to encourage them to get help.

Much of the Lower Mainland already doesn't charge for small amounts already, (I doubt they allow them to retain the drug though) so the talk of "pressure off the overloaded justice and correctional system" is without merit.

Drug abuse literature - LOL. (Sorry, just strikes me as ludicrous. Prissy-minded do-gooder nonsense that's unlikely to convince anyone to get help, unless they happened to be headed in that direction already. Highly improbable.)

Seriously, though - do you think we'd have better outcomes from a policy of confiscation, similar to what I described previously vis a vis Portugal? BTW, I'm not sure I have the details correct about Portugal.

[Jonrox]

Portugal has plenty of lessons for Canada. To start, Canada doesn’t have free, universal access to addiction treatment. While there may be lots of services in Canada, users and their families often can’t afford them or they can’t find them.

Not only is there no linked network of services available in B.C., there isn’t even a central list of what services are available where. In B.C., it’s balkanized by health region. People are limited to the services available in their region and some regions have more services than others.

It’s further complicated by the multitude of non-governmental service providers who are under contract to heath regions.

We saw the results of short-sighted government interference recently here in Penticton, with Pathways no longer funded.

I see the merits in decriminalization, however this point that rustled shared needs repeating.

I've known a few people who fell into this category... they wanted help, but the help can be hard to find and quite often costs a small fortune. I'm not sure this is something a lot of people who have never needed the help or known someone who needed the help would understand. Lots of folks figure if someone needs help all they have to do is go to rehab and if they don't, well they're just being lazy. However, it's not nearly this simple. I know I didn't understand this until these issues hit some people close to me.

Unfortunately, with the free options you often get what you pay for as well. These options are in high demand with long waitlists, understaffed, safety is often a concern, and the level of counselling is generally considerably worse than that at pay-for-service facilities.

[my5cents]

Drug abuse literature - LOL. (Sorry, just strikes me as ludicrous. Prissy-minded do-gooder nonsense that's unlikely to convince anyone to get help, unless they happened to be headed in that direction already. Highly improbable.)

Seriously, though - do you think we'd have better outcomes from a policy of confiscation, similar to what I described previously vis a vis Portugal? BTW, I'm not sure I have the details correct about Portugal.

Apparently the intention of the decriminalization program is for the police to leave the addict with the drugs. The news media stated that the addict would be provided with drug abuse literature. (ya, I know stupid eh ?)

Isn't the major problem that the traffickers are supplying drugs that vary in potency ? One day a certain quantity gives the addict a decent high, the next day the same quantity of what appears to be the same drug, causes a serious overdose ?

Decriminalizing the possession of a user quantity of drugs does nothing to protect the addict, if that's the goal.

How is this a solution ? I don't see it.

As for crimes committed by addicts to buy the drugs, the decriminalization doesn't change anything in that area either.

None of this makes any sense to me.

Now,,, leave the laws the way they are and allow doctors to prescribe opiates on a maintenance basis for drug addicts. Just like if you or I was prescribed a pain killer, we wouldn't be breaking the law being in possession of prescription medication obtained via our own prescription, neither would the addict. Now not looking for a way to illegally obtain funds to purchase questionable quality drugs from a trafficker.

Now, that makes sense to me.

[the truth]

drugs will always be on the streets unless s cumg like this go to jail and stay in jail

[my5cents]

drugs will always be on the streets unless scum like this go to jail and stay in jail

And that's not going to happen. So the solution ?

Illicit drugs is an entire industry. Importers, manufacturers, remanufacturers, distribution centers, local distribution centers, street sales staff and of course the customer. Many spin off jobs, like: security, enforcement, collections, money laundering.... Unlike our society, capital punishment works very well for them as well.

Then there's the customers. Most customers that aren't in the above drug industry, can't afford to purchase the product, so then there's the entire crime industry created by the illicit drug customer involved in petty crime or other illegal acts to obtain funds to purchase the product.

The only real true example of what happens with attempts to prohibit a substance, how it didn't work, how much money it made for the criminals supplying the prohibited substance and how well legalizing and regulating the substance worked, is alcohol, in the good old US of A.

When the USA arrived at the decision that the war on alcohol (prohibition) was being lost, did the USA "decriminalize" alcohol and let the gangs continue to distribute it ? No, they legalized it, regulated it and taxed it. Are there problems with alcohol in our society ? Yes. Did making alcohol illegal rectify that problem ? No. Did legalizing it make the problem worse ? No.

Can't anyone apply some logic to this problem ?

[eires37]

drugs will always be on the streets unless scum like this go to jail and stay in jail

And that's not going to happen. So the solution ?

Illicit drugs is an entire industry. Importers, manufacturers, remanufacturers, distribution centers, local distribution centers, street sales staff and of course the customer. Many spin off jobs, like: security, enforcement, collections, money laundering.... Unlike our society, capital punishment works very well for them as well.

Then there's the customers. Most customers that aren't in the above drug industry, can't afford to purchase the product, so then there's the entire crime industry created by the illicit drug customer involved in petty crime or other illegal acts to obtain funds to purchase the product.

The only real true example of what happens with attempts to prohibit a substance, how it didn't work, how much money it made for the criminals supplying the prohibited substance and how well legalizing and regulating the substance worked, is alcohol, in the good old US of A.

When the USA arrived at the decision that the war on alcohol (prohibition) was being lost, did the USA "decriminalize" alcohol and let the gangs continue to distribute it ? No, they legalized it, regulated it and taxed it. Are there problems with alcohol in our society ? Yes. Did making alcohol illegal rectify that problem ? No. Did legalizing it make the problem worse ? No.

Can't anyone apply some logic to this problem ?

Yea... dont do drugs. Pretty hard concept to grasp

[Jonrox]

drugs will always be on the streets unless scum like this go to jail and stay in jail

Then there's the customers. Most customers that aren't in the above drug industry, can't afford to purchase the product, so then there's the entire crime industry created by the illicit drug customer involved in petty crime or other illegal acts to obtain funds to purchase the product.

I hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of users can afford their drugs just fine. The classic "homeless junkies" that some posters like to hold up as examples of a typical user are actually only a tiny fraction of the actual number of people using illegal drugs on a regular basis.

To a lot of folks they're just the most visible users, but the amount they buy is fairly negligible in the grand scheme of illegal drugs.

Cocaine isn't the granddaddy of all drugs because of "homeless junkies".

[eires37]

Then there's the customers. Most customers that aren't in the above drug industry, can't afford to purchase the product, so then there's the entire crime industry created by the illicit drug customer involved in petty crime or other illegal acts to obtain funds to purchase the product.

I hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of users can afford their drugs just fine. The classic "homeless junkies" that some posters like to hold up as examples of a typical user are actually only a tiny fraction of the actual number of people using illegal drugs on a regular basis.

To a lot of folks they're just the most visible users, but the amount they buy is fairly negligible in the grand scheme of illegal drugs.

Cocaine isn't the granddaddy of all drugs because of "homeless junkies".

What's your point?

[Jonrox]

I hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of users can afford their drugs just fine. The classic "homeless junkies" that some posters like to hold up as examples of a typical user are actually only a tiny fraction of the actual number of people using illegal drugs on a regular basis.

To a lot of folks they're just the most visible users, but the amount they buy is fairly negligible in the grand scheme of illegal drugs.

Cocaine isn't the granddaddy of all drugs because of "homeless junkies".

What's your point?

In the post I quoted, the poster said most users can’t afford their drugs so turn to crime. I was simply pointing out that the vast majority of users CAN afford them without turning to petty crime.

A lot of folks seem to think the majority of drug users are the “homeless junkies” they see on the streets, but that’s just not the case. A lot of people might be surprised to know how widespread drug use actually is among high-functioning people.

[eires37]

What's your point?

In the post I quoted, the poster said most users can’t afford their drugs so turn to crime. I was simply pointing out that the vast majority of users CAN afford them without turning to petty crime.

A lot of folks seem to think the majority of drug users are the “homeless junkies” they see on the streets, but that’s just not the case. A lot of people might be surprised to know how widespread drug use actually is among high-functioning people.

They aren't stealing and thieving from the taxpayers that support them

[common_sense_guy]

Make a separate junkie jail. You're caught with drugs you go to jail for two or three days. You clean out while your there. Still want to do drugs when you get out at least now you'll hide your needles in your paraphernalia and you won't be doing drugs in front of kids and tourists and every other taxpayer that contributes to society unless you want to go back and go through withdrawals again. Give them some incentive to stay clean. There is a deterrent.
So many of you want to go the opposite way and coddle them and try and tell people not to think less of them because of their addiction.
For one I don't think less of them because of their addiction. I think less of them because of the crime they commit to continue their illegal addiction. And what kind of message do you think that sends kids when you decriminalize a life destroying drug. You really not think you're going to get kids experimenting with the drug then and going down that path when you decriminalize the drug and make it easier to get into their hands
Decriminalization just to ease up on the court system is foolish in my opinion. Nothing will help unless you going to have enough Rehabilitation beds available for the junkies at want to get clean.
The way the news reports one side of the argument for decriminalization is making people that would normally not even have to think twice about keeping it illegal to change their mind. Once again media not doing any favours for society. They quote countries where it has worked in the past but leave out important facts such as plenty of Rehabilitation beds and other support in place and not just decriminalization alone . So the Sheep jump on the bandwagon and actually start thinking it's a good idea without having the whole picture. Thanks media.
Society has become a complete joke and media has done nothing but create non thinkers which is exactly what they want. They want clickers and not thinkers.

[the truth]

well said...............

[my5cents]

So many are talking about "decriminalize small amounts of drugs" to free up the courts/police/prisons.

So if we check today's Kelowna court list we should see, what ??? 20 - 25% of the cases involve "Possession of a Controlled Substance" ???? In any even it should be a very frequent charge,,, correct ?

There are 15 pages today (Nov 5th 2021). I did a quick count and found 4, "Possession of a Controlled Substance". There were other drug charges, for example "Possession for the Purpose of Trafficking", but that is a charge that would still remain, being a quantity large enough to warrant trafficking charges.

Take a look for yourself -

https://justice.gov.bc.ca/courts/Kelown ... incial.pdf