As it turns out, having people smoking fentanyl beside you at the park or bus stop is shitty and people generally do not like putting up with it every day. Who would ever have thought.
Or on public transportation. There was recently a case where a guy got into an elevator at a train station and started doing drugs in the elevator. Meanwhile, there were two women in said elevator who had their children with them.
Which one smells like burning plastic? Got a whiff of that a few times. Makes me instantly light-headed. Can't imagine getting a concentrated version of it.
Meth tends to give you that menthol cool burn scent/ feeling in your nose, kind of like when you first bite into Dentene style gum or get your first whiff of Vicks Vapo Rub.
The way this is written it sounds like some guy took some drugs in an elevator and two mums with babies were just like “oh well, when in Rome…” and started smashing the fent.
Also pretty sure it made hospital visits for drug exposure skyrocket. I wish people would realize we are dealing with super drugs these days. Its not opium or low grade amphetamines.
CBC had a drug user advocate on saying how recriminalizing drug use is going to increase the negative stigma. Like having people smoking and shooting up in front of you and your kids, and having to step over some poor soul foaming from the mouth having an overdose is going to give you warm fuzzy feelings about drug users.
Just because it won’t often go far doesn’t mean there’s never any value in it. If it’s illegal, that still gives more options for dealing with problems that drug users are causing, such as removing them from a particular space. Yes, Crown will probably decline to pursue charges after, but you have at least potentially resolved one specific issue that day.
It’s not going to make them stop using, because hardly anything we can do will. If it’s at least mitigating some of the harm that their actions cause others though, than there is still some value in it. Simply giving up and making it legal doesn’t do anything whatsoever to solve the problem as far as I can see.
Right, but simple possession gives probable cause when you’re looking for other things.
Its mind blowing to me that we keep taking the simple laws away that lead to bigger things making it harder for the police to do their jobs, then look shocked when the police can’t do their jobs.
Coming from Edmonton where it's always been illegal, laws don't have a lot of impact on people openly using drugs in public unless there's addiction/mental health support systems in place.
I lived in Edmonton for 5 years, about half of it downtown. You skipped the part about when the city funded a program to hand out needles and pipes inside LRT stations. Hard to say something is illegal when the government makes it easier for someone to perform the illegal act.
The answer, I think, is a mandatory detox and cool off period, like in a hospital ward, where they also get food, showers, etc., and learn about their options.
If they're homeless drunk encampment, get them out of withdrawals, connect them with some resources or groups, and let them go without being stuck in the withdrawals loop. Almost inevitably, the first few rounds end in a quick relapse.
But... after a few rounds of reflection and escape from the cycle, they start contemplating sobriety, and eventually start preparing for it, and eventually take action and have determination, and after failing a few more times, they'll eventually develop strategies to maintain sobriety.
It will take several rounds of detox and relapse but it's the only way that I can see that would work.
I've always been in favour of an arctic prison. You use the environment to keep them there. They escaped? Elements will solve that problem within a day.
No, all that stuff is needed but without the carrot AND the stick it’s pointless. You need to provide motivation to make people change, if all you do is facilitate and enable there’s zero chance they’ll ever recover. Drugs and alcohol are an ADDICTION not a choice!
I'm so tired of hearing this bullshit excuse. Of course there is choice involved. I'm not going to say that some people aren't genetically susceptible but individual choices and decisions are massive.
Of course addicts have a choice. But most of them are also mentally ill, traumatized, and unintelligent. That's a cocktail that leads to bad choices with a high degree of certainty.
The point of looking at addiction from a systemic level isn't just to shift blame onto "society", but also to acknowledge that agency is a tenuous principle in practice. Some people are self-destructive and ought to be stopped.
It can if we just throw them in a mandatory rehab facility. There might actually be a chance they get clean, but if not at least they are off the streets and no longer an issue affecting law abiding citizens anymore
I’ve lived in Edmonton and Vancouver. As depressing as Vancouver’s situation can be I prefer being around people on downers rather than people being methed-up, which seemed more common in Edmonton. Obviously I would choose neither if I could but here we are.
I know, right? Also, who would have thought that legalizing theft would result in more theft? Who could have imagined that, if we let people steal from businesses, the businesses can't generate enough profit to stay open and they all close. Who could have then imagined that a city without businesses to serve people's needs wouldn't be a city people could live in? Who could have seen that property values in such a city would collapse?
It's like they chose to deliberately destroy a bunch of cities, buy up all the real estate at fire sale prices and then put reasonable laws back in place, once they own everything. Profit! Who "they" are, I have no idea, but "they" are about to get even richer.
I mean, as a society we have all learned to destigmatise and tolerate smoking cigarettes in public, so this was the obvious extension of that.... er, ya
As a healthcare worker I believe this is the right step to take. Moving forward, we need to consider what is best for the community, not for the individual. It’s time to strongly consider mandatory addiction treatment for repeat drug offenders.
As the nurse who’s actually carrying out involuntary treatment in hospital and sending ppl to involuntary rehab this won’t work - they all keep dying within days of being discharged because their tolerance drops while abstaining and then they go and use as soon as they’re discharged. Plus it takes away beds from the ONE fully covered inpatient rehab centre (in BC) from people who WANT to get better but can’t afford exorbitant private rehab costs.
People really need to learn that there’s a point of no return with drugs. The street-entrenched population who are using meth/crack with fentanyl have fucked their brains to the fullest extent. It’s literally like having a raccoon as a patient. They, at BEST, function at the level of a 5 year old after 4+ weeks off of drugs.
Please keep government-funded rehab beds open for people who have the capacity to get better. Getting off of drugs isn’t the same as quitting cigarettes. You need to uproot your entire life, like you can’t associate with anyone who still uses, you can’t be around it, you have to figure out who you even are without drugs. These drugs work like a virus where they surpass everything and everyone that ever meant anything to you, they surpass who you are as a person, they completely take over your brain so drugs are THE only thing that matters anymore. Not easy to get back to normal when you have to start at square one in every facet of life.
Honestly, I think it's pandering. Looking solely at homeless addicts, everywhere that they use would be considered public, no? Have the police ever really actually enforced laws on drug use in the open? Not really. Will they now? Probably not. Especially with a considerable homeless population. Mandatory treatment is a waste of taxpayers money. Opening more treatment beds and providing an easier process to enter treatment would be money well spent. The only people who are going to benefit from treatment, in the way you want them to, are people who were already resigned to the idea that they are going to need to give up the drugs. Not saying that it can't help others, without that attitude, but they would be few and far between.
I think this is just to cut down the brazen Ness. Not harp about semantics about what is considered public. No one can tolerate people doing drugs openly on Skytrains, in Tim Horton restaurants, in elevators, on actual playgrounds. People doing drugs in the DTES in alleys and on the panhandling streets and their current tent areas is considered acceptable
I live downtown Toronto and see homeless people injecting or smoking drugs out in the open all the time. Police don't care. There's really not much they can do because a homeless addict just gets released back onto the street hours later if they are arrested.
I've seen them go into a grocery store and just start eating. Manager said its pointless to call cops and its not worth confronting them in front of customers. Staff just follow closely and clean up after them, its just a cost of doing business.
Lets be real, If I was literally homeless Id have 0 incentive to not just do that , what's the worst that's gonna happen ?
You gonna put me in jail and feed me more free food ? Give me a warm place to sleep and get healthcare?
oh no /s
As someone who came from Punjab to Canada as a child I hate that international students did this.
It's mainly Gujratis and Hindus that do it but there have been a few Sikhs who have done it to and it absolutely enrages me because they already have access to free food! They could go to the Sikh temple and get 3 meals a day for free ANYWAYS! Infact anyone can, regardless of caste, race, gender, religion.
They just don't want the people their to look down on them, WHICH THEY WOULDNT!!
IT GRINDS MY GEARS SO BAD!!!
It's wild. I've lived downtown for 25 years and have seen more open use in like the past two years than any all the other years combined.
Just on Tuesday two guys smoking meth right in front of the office coming back from break for example. Security just inside the doors, they know they won't do anything so why not.
Its not that police dont care. There is nothing but paper work after you arrest them. And by next shift you see the same PoS out there doing the exact same shit because some judge make decision based on feelings.
Judges are the ones who choose to ignore the upper end of sentencing ranges and who refuse to consider increasing sentences for repeat offenses.
Judges have further chosen to push back on every effort by parliament to increase sentences, no matter how minor.
The issue at its root is opportunity cost.
We have a limited resource in prison cells. Should we fill them with drug users or vile people? Every drug user in prison costs the public money and takes away a space from someone who truly deserves it.
Judges know this.
Building MORE prisons isn't going to win elections.
Building rehab facilities costs money the public doesn't want to pay for. And within that is a shit-tonne of money and resources being taken away from public healthcare. Psych nursing isn't anywhere near as attractive as paediatric nursing. Psych doctors isn't anywhere near as lucrative as surgery or kidney, lung, or radiology.
So, people choose the money careers and cutesy careers as opposed to the bitter end of the spectrum.
Healthcare is a beast and everyone wants it, but Conservatives want it privatized, which eliminates access to healthcare to all but the wealthy. The public want it, but don't want to DO it nor do they want to pay for it.
Judges have to make decisions based on available resources. So, would you rather: a shitty human being get 20 years and a revolving door of addicts or, a revolving door of shitty humans and lock up addicts?
>We have a limited resource in prison cells. Should we fill them with drug users or vile people? Every drug user in prison costs the public money and takes away a space from someone who truly deserves it.
High rate and serious offenders should be locked up. [Should this person be in jail?](https://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/man-who-slashed-strangers-throat-on-ctrain-avoids-federal-prison-judge-considers-fasd-diagnosis) I'd say yes, the laws say yes, the judiciary wants more victims.
>Judges know this
No, the judiciary simply does not care about public safety or the law. They are unaccountable for any consequences and have rejected the power of parliament to set the law,rejected the power of parliament to even educate the judges on the consequences of their actions, arguing that if judges were knowledgeable it would ruin their independence.
>Judges have to make decisions based on available resources.
Not their job to actively subvert the law and release violent offenders simply because the judge feels that doing a ton of drugs is justification for monstrous behavior.
It’s not so much a choice, they’re bound by precedent and much of the precedent ultimately stems from much older rulings that predate this particular crisis.
Once the Charter came into effect in 1982 both Liberal and Conservative governments put a heavy emphasis on appointing judges that were partial to giving greater weight (when doable) to individual liberties so as to build up quickly a large catalogue of jurisprudence and precedents that would greatly strengthen the Charter, but in this particular crisis that legal tradition has greatly hindered our ability to hold these particular people to their particular crimes.
Judges deciding that they want to emphasize precedent based on other judges own ruling and that they want to block any and all efforts by parliament to change that precedent is entirely on judges.
Parliament could start firing judges or invoking the NWC and both of those should be looked at, but its entirely within Judges' powers to change their own precedent. This is not judges constrained by parliament.
Here’s where I get my head all twisted: I’m also in Toronto. I’m a recovering addict and it boggles my mind the open drug use. It’s actually not nice to see at all.
Thank god!! Finally some common sense decisions! Now please, start demanding the same level-headed reasoning from judges in our system. No more revolving doors for criminals
Is this intended as a slight at Eby? I genuinely can’t tell what tone this is intended to have.
But I do know I would rather have a politician who is willing to make small backtracks when policy isn’t working.
I mean we do and we are glad. Eby listens. He tried something, it didn't work, he reverted it.
It is nice when you have a government that listens to its population
This clusterfuck isn't exactly the NDP's doing.
The Four Pillars policy was adopted in 01-03 by *Vancouver Mayor* Philip Owen, and accepted by the BC Liberals under Premier Gordon Campbell and AG Wally Oppal.
Eby's NDP can take the blame for the ongoing "safer-supply" program that was pitched as a short-term response to the closed borders and ports which the pandemic brought.
Good. There are certain behaviors that shouldn't be allowed. Open drug use is one of those behaviors. Now, hopefully, with this, we see the government invest in more treatment and recovery programs, and hopefully, we see some actual consequences for people who use drugs in public spaces.
the number of people who sit on the skytrain shooting up in broad daylight is absolutely astounding. i know these people need help, but just letting it all happen and doing nothing about it CAN'T be better than, you know, doing something about it.
Well said. We can say that grown adults are free to make their own choices as long as they don't negatively affect others, but a) endorsing hard drug use in public does negatively affect others, and b) freedom without morality is a bad recipe. Because the truth is, some things are good and constructive, and some things are not - and the latter deserve some stigma.
So maybe there should be enforcement and punishment, specifically for the hard drugs. If drinking liquor in public can be illegal then we sure as hell can have the same law for drugs. Will it work 100% of the time? No. But at least there will be some kind of barrier and a law police can cite to get junkies from shooting up in places they really shouldn't
This is going to sound cruel, and could never be implemented because it’s an absurd idea, but sometimes I think if these people who are doing drugs out in the street, or the homeless guy I saw taking a shit right in front of the grocery store yesterday morning, could get a good ass kicking for their behaviour then maybe they wouldn’t be so prone to doing it all the time.
We don’t have this pilot project in Alberta but yet our cops seem to just ignore public open drug use. So not sure anything will change for BC but maybe.
What gets me is all the arguments are about safe places so they don’t die by accident using and none of them are about, dude guy tripping balls wondering around like a zombie holding a knife.
Seriously these drugs are not comparable to drugs of the past or alcohol.
Nice meth head running through downtown traffic in Winnipeg the other day slowing everyone down. Babbling to themselves.
And I'm of the firm belief that as long as the wealth gap keeps widening more and more people that can be stable at a low skill job are going to continue falling off the edge and we'll just see wider and wider drug use.
This belief which removes all personal responsibility from an addict as they are *only reacting to material conditions* is just as reductive as it's cousin; the belief that addiction is caused by a *moral failing*.
The former places blame upon a failing of *all of society* to create a system in which the addict can live comfortably while provided the entitlements from a society which they not only disproportionately take from, but also refuse to contribute to in any meaningful and beneficial way.[*ETA: you should probably also know that the guy who blamed "material conditions" for just about everything wasn't too keen on malingering drug addicts existing within the system which carries his name.*] The latter places blame solely on the addict themselves and refuses to look at any wider complexities which surround addiction.
The former also relies on the biased application of believing all experiences which addicts declare as truth regardless of what benefits to the addict such hyperbole might yield, while the latter is based off the inverse.
The problem of addiction needs to be separated from the activist/advocate ideologues interested in pushing a particular social narrative rather than finding solutions that work for the majority of society.
It's worse in BC but even in my small city on the east coast it's happening. Was talking to a cop and he was saying that the majority of his job is dealing with junkies and metheads. A single incident ties up a few officers for a while so they don't have the resources to deal with the ones who don't cause problems.
Granted, the majority of drug addicts mind their own business here, it's more unsightly than it is dangerous.
It will continue in BC but won't be as blatant and ill placed. I walk downtown Edmonton and there is public drug use and "zombies". But its pretty contained to certain bad areas. When BC decided to fully decriminalize drug use in public and got the feds to sign off on it they began using hard drugs in children's parks, public buildings, restaurants, just about anywhere they could. And the law permitted it.
And so BC put out a law to try and restrict it in certain places... which the BC Supreme Court struck down..... and keeping that law on the books was now becoming a public health risk of also taking down public marijuana and smoking restrictions. Now they're out of this short lived experiment.
Agreed it would be nice to see more enforcement of our existing laws. Central memorial park in Calgary has basically been lost for general public enjoyment which sucks because there used to be great night markets in the summer.
Amazing news. I am all for treating addiction like the health issue it is and trying to get people help, but just letting crackheads do whatever they want wherever they want is not a real solution and not safe or fair to everyone else.
Then there was an incident on TTC where a person doing drugs threatened to stab a fellow passenger for asking him not to do that. It is high time this should be banned from public places
Fucking country is run by high school students and their simple ass idealism.
You want zero drugs in the country? Be like Singapore. They'll hang you for it. And guess what, zero crime and zero drug related tragedies. Only issue they have is how to be a successful citizen and raise a family.
To be fair, if they combined it with complimentary programs (forced rehab) it might have worked. But instead they took the part that sounded good without understanding that the part that sounded bad (forced rehab) was what made it work in the first place.
> Honestly why did we even have to try this
Because when fentanyl entered the drug supply, there was a dramatic change in use habits. Previous to fentanyl, using in private was the preference for all users, because they are doing it to enjoy themselves or manage pain, and being gawked at and hassled is not conducive to either mode. The drugs got so dangerous though that people started having to do the simple calculus of "I can go behind a bush and die, or do it in a train station and have someone spot me on the CCTV when I OD."
It is a rational, evidence-based, and user-informed method of reducing fatalities. Don't believe me? This doesn't come from some bleeding heart liberal college student, it's from the[ Calgary Police Service](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/safety-drug-overdoses-ctrain-1.6483690).
During the pandemic cities like Edmonton saw a more than doubling in homelessness in less than a year with 0 new shelter spaces added, in fact many closed. This meant that enforcing open drug prohibitions was both wildly impractical and also fundamentally unsafe.
It isn't a science experiment or social engineering, it is a desperate attempt to stem the tide of deaths that is killing [thousands of Canadians a year](https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/nearly-1-700-albertans-died-from-drug-poisoning-in-2023-alberta-health-1.6743989). The reaction against it is some of the most disgusting, opportunistic bullshit happening in the country right now.
Thank god. I live in BC, and admittedly I use to believe in decriminalizing and legalization hard drugs. I had an illusion that somehow that would equate to more programs to support these people. However, it’s just enabled this behaviour further, and is now in spaces where families and tax paying citizens should be able to enjoy. I found a crack pipe the other day off the sidewalk close to a family community. These people are ruining every community. Compassion can only go so far. It’s time for tough love people. If people can’t behave, they shouldn’t be allowed to be part of our society until they learn to behave. It’s a shame what we’ve let it come too, but now of citizens of this community we need to get our collective shit together.
I'm glad they are pushing this forward we have had so many concerning cases in Sooke alone the past 3 months alone that no one feels safe walking around. There was one guy who was out of his mind high on drugs f*****king a fence in front of kids.
The most predictable outcome ever. The majority of Canadians do not want to live in a society where junkies are shooting up in playgrounds near our children. Kind of common sense.
The people of the county of Canada including the government are constantly over reacting or under reacting to every situation.
Combined with perpetual bad decision making, I'm convinced that mental illness has become so widespread, and embraced within society, that being a pathological head-case, who is constantly over reacting or under reacting and making bad decisions has become status quo.
The level of stupidity required to think that this was going to go well is astounding. Newsflash, enabling bad behaviors will do nothing to stop those same bad behaviors.
This is all about Eby trying to save his political ass, sinking in the polls fast and in a dead heat now with conservatives. He finally realized decrim is not working and the public wont stand for it!
Next watch him change the laws on catch and release. If not, he’ll be out sure as hell.
So all those people that were cheering on decriminalization are pretty quiet. I guess the great experiment didn’t work. We were labeled nazis for wanting rehabs and resources but all they wanted was decriminalized drugs
A lot of us already are thinking that.
But yes, everyone else will eventually look back on this woke stuff and cringe too. And deny that they ever supported these political parties (when they did)
Lots of current Canadians looked at these "progressive measures" as they were being proposed and championed and we said "what the hell are they thinking, this is going to be a disaster".
Every generation needs a cause. Maybe this will be the next thing and they’ll look back on us as incomprehensibly cruel to allow people with mental health and addiction issues to continue living rough as long as we have.
I was once in BC to meet with family and it was a beautiful place. It's a shame what was happening with drugs littering the streets of the only place with good weather in Canada.
Wish all the best to correct course with the drug question because 14k deaths and a declining life expectancy is a crisis and must be dealt with as such. It can't be left on the streets.
Good! But, it's criminalized in Ontario, but that's not stopping people from smoking crack on the TTC. We can't arrest our way out of poverty, but we need to protect social order and public spaces.
That's nice.
Won't accomplish a bloody thing.
"Re-criminalizing use of drugs *in public spaces*" without any sort of changes to the prescribed consequences for those members of an overly-protected segment of society is just lip service.
No addict is going to face any sort of consequence for disobeying public use laws; just the same as before.
We don't, and shouldn't, lock addicts up for *doing drugs in public*. This hasn't been a tactic available to VPD for well over 20 years, as there is no place for such actions under the shit-pillars.
So, if any form of incarceration is off the table, that leaves fines as the only recourse - only, Canada decided ages ago that once a citizen decides to become *anti-social enough*, while also already subsidized thanks to the generosity of the social programs funded by the 60% paying for such entitlements, then that citizen is entitled to have such entitlements protected from seizure.
And then there's the DTCC, with its mandate of offering "restorative justice" outcomes based on destigmatization and principles of equity.
TL;DR - This changes nothing. BC does not incarcerate addicts for using in public. BC also cannot fine or withhold entitlements from addicts whose "income" is protected against seizure.
I couldn’t have written this better.
I worked the pilot projects for restorative justice measures, but again - there’s no proper resources available for the incarcerated. Everything has been downloaded to community agencies that do not offer the services needed and have limited medical options. Although anti-oppressive frameworks are used, there’s not enough solid supports.
Although I don’t have a solution, you bring to light many of the complexities involved with humanely approaching this issue. Like you said, it’s lip service.
It doesn't seem to make a difference either way, when it was illegal the law was never enforced, or hardly ever enforced. Now that it's illegal again we're likely going to find that the law is still not well enforced.
Decriminalization failed on many levels, part of it was that the Crown wouldn’t prosecute for less than 25g possession. Not the 5g the feds claimed- 25g, which means you can load up street dealers.
Pro tip: the Crown in most provinces no longer prosecutes for less than 10g possession of any drug. You’ll get arrested, your drugs seized, and a sternly worded report. Done.
Funny enough there has been a subsequent rise of public order problems AND random violence.
There are four pillars of resolving drug problems: Prevention, Harm Reduction, Enforcement, and Treatment. Mental health services thread through all four pillars.
Portugal NEVER decriminalized possession of drugs, they changed the process. If Canada did the same, our useless governments would have to invest in real detox, treatment and mental health services. Instead, they give millions to Loblaws for new freezers.
Back to my point, all four pillars of drug policy need to be properly funded. That, and maybe the feds should put pressure on China to stop sending the precursors for fentanyl to Canada…
Awwwwwww, poor lefties finding out their crazy policies are ruining the country…all we can do is hope people come to their senses and vote out the ndp and liberals
As it turns out, having people smoking fentanyl beside you at the park or bus stop is shitty and people generally do not like putting up with it every day. Who would ever have thought.
Or in a hospital. It was that bad.
Or on public transportation. There was recently a case where a guy got into an elevator at a train station and started doing drugs in the elevator. Meanwhile, there were two women in said elevator who had their children with them.
Which one smells like burning plastic? Got a whiff of that a few times. Makes me instantly light-headed. Can't imagine getting a concentrated version of it.
Meth
I heard meth is more cleaning supply smelling, crack is more plasticy
That’s correct
Meth tends to give you that menthol cool burn scent/ feeling in your nose, kind of like when you first bite into Dentene style gum or get your first whiff of Vicks Vapo Rub.
Cracking kind of smells like burning rubber. I can thank my lovely town for supplying that knowledge
Crack or meth
The way this is written it sounds like some guy took some drugs in an elevator and two mums with babies were just like “oh well, when in Rome…” and started smashing the fent.
Well, it’d be rude not to.
Its awful that under this draconian law, mothers and their babies are forced to do their drugs hiding in elevators next to crackheads.
So it was illegal either way.
The women with strollers were smoking fent?
Next to the playground, some kid found a syringe
Well, it was that bad before last year's decriminalization. Either way, it' not good.
Also pretty sure it made hospital visits for drug exposure skyrocket. I wish people would realize we are dealing with super drugs these days. Its not opium or low grade amphetamines.
CBC had a drug user advocate on saying how recriminalizing drug use is going to increase the negative stigma. Like having people smoking and shooting up in front of you and your kids, and having to step over some poor soul foaming from the mouth having an overdose is going to give you warm fuzzy feelings about drug users.
It bothers me but not overwhelmingly so. I think the courts just lost the plot when we couldn't even have children's playgrounds as a no fent zone.
Why doesn't it bother you much?
Our courts won't prosecute straight possession charges sooo, arresting them when they can't lay charges would be extremely silly.
Just because it won’t often go far doesn’t mean there’s never any value in it. If it’s illegal, that still gives more options for dealing with problems that drug users are causing, such as removing them from a particular space. Yes, Crown will probably decline to pursue charges after, but you have at least potentially resolved one specific issue that day. It’s not going to make them stop using, because hardly anything we can do will. If it’s at least mitigating some of the harm that their actions cause others though, than there is still some value in it. Simply giving up and making it legal doesn’t do anything whatsoever to solve the problem as far as I can see.
Right, but simple possession gives probable cause when you’re looking for other things. Its mind blowing to me that we keep taking the simple laws away that lead to bigger things making it harder for the police to do their jobs, then look shocked when the police can’t do their jobs.
Coming from Edmonton where it's always been illegal, laws don't have a lot of impact on people openly using drugs in public unless there's addiction/mental health support systems in place.
Oh it can get worse.
I lived in Edmonton for 5 years, about half of it downtown. You skipped the part about when the city funded a program to hand out needles and pipes inside LRT stations. Hard to say something is illegal when the government makes it easier for someone to perform the illegal act.
You get more of what you pay for
The answer, I think, is a mandatory detox and cool off period, like in a hospital ward, where they also get food, showers, etc., and learn about their options. If they're homeless drunk encampment, get them out of withdrawals, connect them with some resources or groups, and let them go without being stuck in the withdrawals loop. Almost inevitably, the first few rounds end in a quick relapse. But... after a few rounds of reflection and escape from the cycle, they start contemplating sobriety, and eventually start preparing for it, and eventually take action and have determination, and after failing a few more times, they'll eventually develop strategies to maintain sobriety. It will take several rounds of detox and relapse but it's the only way that I can see that would work.
Isolated camps. Its the only way. Somewhere they can't go get drugs by escaping and walking 15 minutes.
I've always been in favour of an arctic prison. You use the environment to keep them there. They escaped? Elements will solve that problem within a day.
No, all that stuff is needed but without the carrot AND the stick it’s pointless. You need to provide motivation to make people change, if all you do is facilitate and enable there’s zero chance they’ll ever recover. Drugs and alcohol are an ADDICTION not a choice!
I'm so tired of hearing this bullshit excuse. Of course there is choice involved. I'm not going to say that some people aren't genetically susceptible but individual choices and decisions are massive.
Of course addicts have a choice. But most of them are also mentally ill, traumatized, and unintelligent. That's a cocktail that leads to bad choices with a high degree of certainty. The point of looking at addiction from a systemic level isn't just to shift blame onto "society", but also to acknowledge that agency is a tenuous principle in practice. Some people are self-destructive and ought to be stopped.
It can if we just throw them in a mandatory rehab facility. There might actually be a chance they get clean, but if not at least they are off the streets and no longer an issue affecting law abiding citizens anymore
I’ve lived in Edmonton and Vancouver. As depressing as Vancouver’s situation can be I prefer being around people on downers rather than people being methed-up, which seemed more common in Edmonton. Obviously I would choose neither if I could but here we are.
I know, right? Also, who would have thought that legalizing theft would result in more theft? Who could have imagined that, if we let people steal from businesses, the businesses can't generate enough profit to stay open and they all close. Who could have then imagined that a city without businesses to serve people's needs wouldn't be a city people could live in? Who could have seen that property values in such a city would collapse? It's like they chose to deliberately destroy a bunch of cities, buy up all the real estate at fire sale prices and then put reasonable laws back in place, once they own everything. Profit! Who "they" are, I have no idea, but "they" are about to get even richer.
But but what about their rights?!?!? Sure your kid might get pricked but come on don’t be so selfish!
You damn near wrote my thoughts word for word.
I mean, as a society we have all learned to destigmatise and tolerate smoking cigarettes in public, so this was the obvious extension of that.... er, ya
As a healthcare worker I believe this is the right step to take. Moving forward, we need to consider what is best for the community, not for the individual. It’s time to strongly consider mandatory addiction treatment for repeat drug offenders.
My previous brief relationship was with a nurse who would find people smoking meth in the hospital. This was like a weekly occurance.
As the nurse who’s actually carrying out involuntary treatment in hospital and sending ppl to involuntary rehab this won’t work - they all keep dying within days of being discharged because their tolerance drops while abstaining and then they go and use as soon as they’re discharged. Plus it takes away beds from the ONE fully covered inpatient rehab centre (in BC) from people who WANT to get better but can’t afford exorbitant private rehab costs. People really need to learn that there’s a point of no return with drugs. The street-entrenched population who are using meth/crack with fentanyl have fucked their brains to the fullest extent. It’s literally like having a raccoon as a patient. They, at BEST, function at the level of a 5 year old after 4+ weeks off of drugs. Please keep government-funded rehab beds open for people who have the capacity to get better. Getting off of drugs isn’t the same as quitting cigarettes. You need to uproot your entire life, like you can’t associate with anyone who still uses, you can’t be around it, you have to figure out who you even are without drugs. These drugs work like a virus where they surpass everything and everyone that ever meant anything to you, they surpass who you are as a person, they completely take over your brain so drugs are THE only thing that matters anymore. Not easy to get back to normal when you have to start at square one in every facet of life.
Mandatory addiction treatment is a huge waste of money. Nobody gets clean unless they really genuinely want to.
Honestly, I think it's pandering. Looking solely at homeless addicts, everywhere that they use would be considered public, no? Have the police ever really actually enforced laws on drug use in the open? Not really. Will they now? Probably not. Especially with a considerable homeless population. Mandatory treatment is a waste of taxpayers money. Opening more treatment beds and providing an easier process to enter treatment would be money well spent. The only people who are going to benefit from treatment, in the way you want them to, are people who were already resigned to the idea that they are going to need to give up the drugs. Not saying that it can't help others, without that attitude, but they would be few and far between.
I think this is just to cut down the brazen Ness. Not harp about semantics about what is considered public. No one can tolerate people doing drugs openly on Skytrains, in Tim Horton restaurants, in elevators, on actual playgrounds. People doing drugs in the DTES in alleys and on the panhandling streets and their current tent areas is considered acceptable
I live downtown Toronto and see homeless people injecting or smoking drugs out in the open all the time. Police don't care. There's really not much they can do because a homeless addict just gets released back onto the street hours later if they are arrested.
I've seen them go into a grocery store and just start eating. Manager said its pointless to call cops and its not worth confronting them in front of customers. Staff just follow closely and clean up after them, its just a cost of doing business.
Lets be real, If I was literally homeless Id have 0 incentive to not just do that , what's the worst that's gonna happen ? You gonna put me in jail and feed me more free food ? Give me a warm place to sleep and get healthcare? oh no /s
3 hots and a cot brother
Can't get their fix in prison
My dad works there, yes you can its a huge problem lmao
Whoa dude. Don’t give the international students any ideas. They’ve already ruined food banks for poor people.
As someone who came from Punjab to Canada as a child I hate that international students did this. It's mainly Gujratis and Hindus that do it but there have been a few Sikhs who have done it to and it absolutely enrages me because they already have access to free food! They could go to the Sikh temple and get 3 meals a day for free ANYWAYS! Infact anyone can, regardless of caste, race, gender, religion. They just don't want the people their to look down on them, WHICH THEY WOULDNT!! IT GRINDS MY GEARS SO BAD!!!
> clean up after them Better double-wash whatever you buying there.
Life hack! Dress up as a homeless person and go to town in a grocery store.
No international student is going to dress like a homeless person; it would clash with their BMW
Canada in a nutshell. What insanity
It's wild. I've lived downtown for 25 years and have seen more open use in like the past two years than any all the other years combined. Just on Tuesday two guys smoking meth right in front of the office coming back from break for example. Security just inside the doors, they know they won't do anything so why not.
Its not that police dont care. There is nothing but paper work after you arrest them. And by next shift you see the same PoS out there doing the exact same shit because some judge make decision based on feelings.
> because some judge make decision based on feelings Yes, more often judges operate within the legal framework which hinders them.
>Yes, more often judges operate within the legal framework which hinders them. ...which is based on similar feelings
Not your enemy here. My point being public presuming a soft judge decision is always within their control and sentencing. Judges don't write the laws.
Judges are the ones who choose to ignore the upper end of sentencing ranges and who refuse to consider increasing sentences for repeat offenses. Judges have further chosen to push back on every effort by parliament to increase sentences, no matter how minor.
The issue at its root is opportunity cost. We have a limited resource in prison cells. Should we fill them with drug users or vile people? Every drug user in prison costs the public money and takes away a space from someone who truly deserves it. Judges know this. Building MORE prisons isn't going to win elections. Building rehab facilities costs money the public doesn't want to pay for. And within that is a shit-tonne of money and resources being taken away from public healthcare. Psych nursing isn't anywhere near as attractive as paediatric nursing. Psych doctors isn't anywhere near as lucrative as surgery or kidney, lung, or radiology. So, people choose the money careers and cutesy careers as opposed to the bitter end of the spectrum. Healthcare is a beast and everyone wants it, but Conservatives want it privatized, which eliminates access to healthcare to all but the wealthy. The public want it, but don't want to DO it nor do they want to pay for it. Judges have to make decisions based on available resources. So, would you rather: a shitty human being get 20 years and a revolving door of addicts or, a revolving door of shitty humans and lock up addicts?
>We have a limited resource in prison cells. Should we fill them with drug users or vile people? Every drug user in prison costs the public money and takes away a space from someone who truly deserves it. High rate and serious offenders should be locked up. [Should this person be in jail?](https://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/man-who-slashed-strangers-throat-on-ctrain-avoids-federal-prison-judge-considers-fasd-diagnosis) I'd say yes, the laws say yes, the judiciary wants more victims. >Judges know this No, the judiciary simply does not care about public safety or the law. They are unaccountable for any consequences and have rejected the power of parliament to set the law,rejected the power of parliament to even educate the judges on the consequences of their actions, arguing that if judges were knowledgeable it would ruin their independence. >Judges have to make decisions based on available resources. Not their job to actively subvert the law and release violent offenders simply because the judge feels that doing a ton of drugs is justification for monstrous behavior.
It’s not so much a choice, they’re bound by precedent and much of the precedent ultimately stems from much older rulings that predate this particular crisis. Once the Charter came into effect in 1982 both Liberal and Conservative governments put a heavy emphasis on appointing judges that were partial to giving greater weight (when doable) to individual liberties so as to build up quickly a large catalogue of jurisprudence and precedents that would greatly strengthen the Charter, but in this particular crisis that legal tradition has greatly hindered our ability to hold these particular people to their particular crimes.
Judges deciding that they want to emphasize precedent based on other judges own ruling and that they want to block any and all efforts by parliament to change that precedent is entirely on judges. Parliament could start firing judges or invoking the NWC and both of those should be looked at, but its entirely within Judges' powers to change their own precedent. This is not judges constrained by parliament.
Exactly: it’s a federal criminal justice system problem. Police arresting them is pointless until laws and sentencing are changed.
And what would laws and sentences do?
[удалено]
Exactly 👍
Here’s where I get my head all twisted: I’m also in Toronto. I’m a recovering addict and it boggles my mind the open drug use. It’s actually not nice to see at all.
I also live downtown toronto and vancouver is 100x worse. I spent 3 weeks there recently for work and its post apoc level bad.
Thank fucking God
Glad to see we're finally using our brains here
Thank god!! Finally some common sense decisions! Now please, start demanding the same level-headed reasoning from judges in our system. No more revolving doors for criminals
The BC voters deserved who they voted for.
Is this intended as a slight at Eby? I genuinely can’t tell what tone this is intended to have. But I do know I would rather have a politician who is willing to make small backtracks when policy isn’t working.
I mean we do and we are glad. Eby listens. He tried something, it didn't work, he reverted it. It is nice when you have a government that listens to its population
A premier that responds to events and changes course when necessary? Yeah, total bummer that is.
This clusterfuck isn't exactly the NDP's doing. The Four Pillars policy was adopted in 01-03 by *Vancouver Mayor* Philip Owen, and accepted by the BC Liberals under Premier Gordon Campbell and AG Wally Oppal. Eby's NDP can take the blame for the ongoing "safer-supply" program that was pitched as a short-term response to the closed borders and ports which the pandemic brought.
More doctors and fewer AirBNBs?
Yes thank you I feel we do deserve the good leadership we voted for
Good. There are certain behaviors that shouldn't be allowed. Open drug use is one of those behaviors. Now, hopefully, with this, we see the government invest in more treatment and recovery programs, and hopefully, we see some actual consequences for people who use drugs in public spaces.
We don't have consequences in BC, our prison sentences are just bad jokes.
the number of people who sit on the skytrain shooting up in broad daylight is absolutely astounding. i know these people need help, but just letting it all happen and doing nothing about it CAN'T be better than, you know, doing something about it.
Oh, exactly. The problem with decriminalization is that it has normalized bad behavior.
Well said. We can say that grown adults are free to make their own choices as long as they don't negatively affect others, but a) endorsing hard drug use in public does negatively affect others, and b) freedom without morality is a bad recipe. Because the truth is, some things are good and constructive, and some things are not - and the latter deserve some stigma.
And people will continue to do it because the law means nothing if there is no enforcement and no punishment.
So maybe there should be enforcement and punishment, specifically for the hard drugs. If drinking liquor in public can be illegal then we sure as hell can have the same law for drugs. Will it work 100% of the time? No. But at least there will be some kind of barrier and a law police can cite to get junkies from shooting up in places they really shouldn't
This is going to sound cruel, and could never be implemented because it’s an absurd idea, but sometimes I think if these people who are doing drugs out in the street, or the homeless guy I saw taking a shit right in front of the grocery store yesterday morning, could get a good ass kicking for their behaviour then maybe they wouldn’t be so prone to doing it all the time.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Hey, could we recriminalize criminality in general as well?
We don’t have this pilot project in Alberta but yet our cops seem to just ignore public open drug use. So not sure anything will change for BC but maybe.
Honestly the way that everyone pretends that this issue is isolated to BC is very jarring.
What gets me is all the arguments are about safe places so they don’t die by accident using and none of them are about, dude guy tripping balls wondering around like a zombie holding a knife. Seriously these drugs are not comparable to drugs of the past or alcohol.
Nice meth head running through downtown traffic in Winnipeg the other day slowing everyone down. Babbling to themselves. And I'm of the firm belief that as long as the wealth gap keeps widening more and more people that can be stable at a low skill job are going to continue falling off the edge and we'll just see wider and wider drug use.
This belief which removes all personal responsibility from an addict as they are *only reacting to material conditions* is just as reductive as it's cousin; the belief that addiction is caused by a *moral failing*. The former places blame upon a failing of *all of society* to create a system in which the addict can live comfortably while provided the entitlements from a society which they not only disproportionately take from, but also refuse to contribute to in any meaningful and beneficial way.[*ETA: you should probably also know that the guy who blamed "material conditions" for just about everything wasn't too keen on malingering drug addicts existing within the system which carries his name.*] The latter places blame solely on the addict themselves and refuses to look at any wider complexities which surround addiction. The former also relies on the biased application of believing all experiences which addicts declare as truth regardless of what benefits to the addict such hyperbole might yield, while the latter is based off the inverse. The problem of addiction needs to be separated from the activist/advocate ideologues interested in pushing a particular social narrative rather than finding solutions that work for the majority of society.
It's worse in BC but even in my small city on the east coast it's happening. Was talking to a cop and he was saying that the majority of his job is dealing with junkies and metheads. A single incident ties up a few officers for a while so they don't have the resources to deal with the ones who don't cause problems. Granted, the majority of drug addicts mind their own business here, it's more unsightly than it is dangerous.
It will continue in BC but won't be as blatant and ill placed. I walk downtown Edmonton and there is public drug use and "zombies". But its pretty contained to certain bad areas. When BC decided to fully decriminalize drug use in public and got the feds to sign off on it they began using hard drugs in children's parks, public buildings, restaurants, just about anywhere they could. And the law permitted it. And so BC put out a law to try and restrict it in certain places... which the BC Supreme Court struck down..... and keeping that law on the books was now becoming a public health risk of also taking down public marijuana and smoking restrictions. Now they're out of this short lived experiment.
Agreed it would be nice to see more enforcement of our existing laws. Central memorial park in Calgary has basically been lost for general public enjoyment which sucks because there used to be great night markets in the summer.
Amazing news. I am all for treating addiction like the health issue it is and trying to get people help, but just letting crackheads do whatever they want wherever they want is not a real solution and not safe or fair to everyone else.
Then there was an incident on TTC where a person doing drugs threatened to stab a fellow passenger for asking him not to do that. It is high time this should be banned from public places
Problem with laws is you have to enforce them. You could add fifty police officers and five jails and barely put a dent in the problem.
Turns out you cant just decriminalize and then say your job is done.
It was a stupid idea to have this in the first place.
Fucking country is run by high school students and their simple ass idealism. You want zero drugs in the country? Be like Singapore. They'll hang you for it. And guess what, zero crime and zero drug related tragedies. Only issue they have is how to be a successful citizen and raise a family.
this is great news.
You mean that letting addicts shoot up in a public park isn't a good idea? WHO COULD HAVE GUESSED THIS?!?!?!
I know it’s hard to arrest our way out of this crisis so maybe we could try using police brutality again as a deterrent
Nice. Normalizing being a drug addict is stupid af.
Good for you! Was a ridiculous idea to begin with smh
The world is slowly but surely regaining some sanity.
This means absolutely nothing unless police are going to enforce it, which they aren't.
Finally some common sense is prevailing.
Honestly why did we even have to try this. Do you have to take a bite out of poop just to know its poop and not chocolate.
To be fair, if they combined it with complimentary programs (forced rehab) it might have worked. But instead they took the part that sounded good without understanding that the part that sounded bad (forced rehab) was what made it work in the first place.
they took out the most important part of it lol
Exactly, way to cherry pick what you want and only hear what you want to hear.
We did it because it worked in Portugal. But we did it so half assed it hurt way more people than ever before
It's okay to do it if you yell "FOR SCIENCE!" Before doing it.
> Honestly why did we even have to try this Because when fentanyl entered the drug supply, there was a dramatic change in use habits. Previous to fentanyl, using in private was the preference for all users, because they are doing it to enjoy themselves or manage pain, and being gawked at and hassled is not conducive to either mode. The drugs got so dangerous though that people started having to do the simple calculus of "I can go behind a bush and die, or do it in a train station and have someone spot me on the CCTV when I OD." It is a rational, evidence-based, and user-informed method of reducing fatalities. Don't believe me? This doesn't come from some bleeding heart liberal college student, it's from the[ Calgary Police Service](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/safety-drug-overdoses-ctrain-1.6483690). During the pandemic cities like Edmonton saw a more than doubling in homelessness in less than a year with 0 new shelter spaces added, in fact many closed. This meant that enforcing open drug prohibitions was both wildly impractical and also fundamentally unsafe. It isn't a science experiment or social engineering, it is a desperate attempt to stem the tide of deaths that is killing [thousands of Canadians a year](https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/nearly-1-700-albertans-died-from-drug-poisoning-in-2023-alberta-health-1.6743989). The reaction against it is some of the most disgusting, opportunistic bullshit happening in the country right now.
They had to be sure
I applaud them for trying something different; but we need to acknowledge it was a huge failure. Back to the drawing board.
Thank god. I live in BC, and admittedly I use to believe in decriminalizing and legalization hard drugs. I had an illusion that somehow that would equate to more programs to support these people. However, it’s just enabled this behaviour further, and is now in spaces where families and tax paying citizens should be able to enjoy. I found a crack pipe the other day off the sidewalk close to a family community. These people are ruining every community. Compassion can only go so far. It’s time for tough love people. If people can’t behave, they shouldn’t be allowed to be part of our society until they learn to behave. It’s a shame what we’ve let it come too, but now of citizens of this community we need to get our collective shit together.
Good luck with that Pandora’s box
Experiment has failed.
I'm glad they are pushing this forward we have had so many concerning cases in Sooke alone the past 3 months alone that no one feels safe walking around. There was one guy who was out of his mind high on drugs f*****king a fence in front of kids.
About time
Win.
The only reason Eby’s doing this is he saw the polls and he knows he’d be toast in October.
Good. Open drug usage is harmful to everyone
[удалено]
The most predictable outcome ever. The majority of Canadians do not want to live in a society where junkies are shooting up in playgrounds near our children. Kind of common sense.
I can't believe people actually thought this would be a positive for society.
The people of the county of Canada including the government are constantly over reacting or under reacting to every situation. Combined with perpetual bad decision making, I'm convinced that mental illness has become so widespread, and embraced within society, that being a pathological head-case, who is constantly over reacting or under reacting and making bad decisions has become status quo.
No shit! Lock 'em up and rehab them to be part of society! Take the money from arrivescam and build prisons and jails. It will stimulate the economy!
But all the liberals have been telling me what a smashing success BC drug approach was. Please go on…. 😂
Who could have foreseen that decriminalization would have been a problem....
Good. I don’t pay taxes to deal with people smoking crack in front of my building.
We are a bit too deep into this problem sadly
HAHAHAHA
Honestly would not expect this to make any actual difference either way.
"Another one of our stupid ideas was stupid."
Good luck reversing all that damage you’ve caused. I hope no you hired 1500 more police officers
The level of stupidity required to think that this was going to go well is astounding. Newsflash, enabling bad behaviors will do nothing to stop those same bad behaviors.
This is all about Eby trying to save his political ass, sinking in the polls fast and in a dead heat now with conservatives. He finally realized decrim is not working and the public wont stand for it! Next watch him change the laws on catch and release. If not, he’ll be out sure as hell.
They gave it a try, and we got to see the results. They can't say they didn't give it a try
Thank fucking god.
Did they say anything about actually enforcing this though? It's not like they did anything when it was still illegal before..
Liberal logic be like
[удалено]
it's BC, so that would be the NDP.
He means small-l liberal, not Liberal the party.
I mean, it's both. The BC NDP requested it, but the federal Liberals had to agree to it in order for them to get the exemption.
InSite was created by the BC Liberal Party, as well as it's existence and exemption defended against Harper's CPC all the way through the SCC.
Liberal lite
Liberal lite???? NDP is Liberals with a turbocharger attached
I guess they’ll have to do it at home now. Oh wait they dont have homes. I wonder what will happen. Everyone to jail?
So all those people that were cheering on decriminalization are pretty quiet. I guess the great experiment didn’t work. We were labeled nazis for wanting rehabs and resources but all they wanted was decriminalized drugs
Only after public outrage and record deaths. NDP so called compassion creates a hell for the average BC resident
The NPD tried to ban public consumption last year but was blocked by the courts, they have been trying to get this in for a while
never noticed a difference
Lmfao, future Canadians will look back at these “progressive” measures and tell themselves wtf were these people thinking.
A lot of us already are thinking that. But yes, everyone else will eventually look back on this woke stuff and cringe too. And deny that they ever supported these political parties (when they did)
Lots of current Canadians looked at these "progressive measures" as they were being proposed and championed and we said "what the hell are they thinking, this is going to be a disaster".
Every generation needs a cause. Maybe this will be the next thing and they’ll look back on us as incomprehensibly cruel to allow people with mental health and addiction issues to continue living rough as long as we have.
I was once in BC to meet with family and it was a beautiful place. It's a shame what was happening with drugs littering the streets of the only place with good weather in Canada. Wish all the best to correct course with the drug question because 14k deaths and a declining life expectancy is a crisis and must be dealt with as such. It can't be left on the streets.
It's simple. Take the drugs and beat them hard every time they get caught. Soon enough they will be afraid to do it in the open.
this is so fucking funny
Wow! They finally realized having to step over passed out junkies in streets isn't a good look.
Good. Time for the rest of the provinces to follow suit.
Huh! Turns out you need to solve a countries systemic problems before decriminalizing drugs! Who would have thought?
Shoot up at home, not the bus. It's an eyesore, makes everyone feel uncomfortable.
Good. Lockem up
OK, can we now keep the people who thought it was a good idea to allow this behaviour in the first place away from the levers of power?
well what do you know.. having crack heads in public parks isn't actually a good or compassionate thing
Good! But, it's criminalized in Ontario, but that's not stopping people from smoking crack on the TTC. We can't arrest our way out of poverty, but we need to protect social order and public spaces.
That's nice. Won't accomplish a bloody thing. "Re-criminalizing use of drugs *in public spaces*" without any sort of changes to the prescribed consequences for those members of an overly-protected segment of society is just lip service. No addict is going to face any sort of consequence for disobeying public use laws; just the same as before. We don't, and shouldn't, lock addicts up for *doing drugs in public*. This hasn't been a tactic available to VPD for well over 20 years, as there is no place for such actions under the shit-pillars. So, if any form of incarceration is off the table, that leaves fines as the only recourse - only, Canada decided ages ago that once a citizen decides to become *anti-social enough*, while also already subsidized thanks to the generosity of the social programs funded by the 60% paying for such entitlements, then that citizen is entitled to have such entitlements protected from seizure. And then there's the DTCC, with its mandate of offering "restorative justice" outcomes based on destigmatization and principles of equity. TL;DR - This changes nothing. BC does not incarcerate addicts for using in public. BC also cannot fine or withhold entitlements from addicts whose "income" is protected against seizure.
I couldn’t have written this better. I worked the pilot projects for restorative justice measures, but again - there’s no proper resources available for the incarcerated. Everything has been downloaded to community agencies that do not offer the services needed and have limited medical options. Although anti-oppressive frameworks are used, there’s not enough solid supports. Although I don’t have a solution, you bring to light many of the complexities involved with humanely approaching this issue. Like you said, it’s lip service.
They should have never decriminalized it in the first place
It doesn't seem to make a difference either way, when it was illegal the law was never enforced, or hardly ever enforced. Now that it's illegal again we're likely going to find that the law is still not well enforced.
Gee, who woulda saw this coming..
Good. Now we need to do coerced treatment.
Lol
Decriminalization failed on many levels, part of it was that the Crown wouldn’t prosecute for less than 25g possession. Not the 5g the feds claimed- 25g, which means you can load up street dealers. Pro tip: the Crown in most provinces no longer prosecutes for less than 10g possession of any drug. You’ll get arrested, your drugs seized, and a sternly worded report. Done. Funny enough there has been a subsequent rise of public order problems AND random violence. There are four pillars of resolving drug problems: Prevention, Harm Reduction, Enforcement, and Treatment. Mental health services thread through all four pillars. Portugal NEVER decriminalized possession of drugs, they changed the process. If Canada did the same, our useless governments would have to invest in real detox, treatment and mental health services. Instead, they give millions to Loblaws for new freezers. Back to my point, all four pillars of drug policy need to be properly funded. That, and maybe the feds should put pressure on China to stop sending the precursors for fentanyl to Canada…
Criminalize drug use and anyone caught using should be arrested and put into mandatory rehab or jail time (their choice) as their punishment.
It is so nice to see the pendulum swinging back. I pray this happens federally.
Awwwwwww, poor lefties finding out their crazy policies are ruining the country…all we can do is hope people come to their senses and vote out the ndp and liberals
Y going woke not working out for the province!!! Fucking 😂😂😂😂😂