comment: >
  
  How do you think these things happen? It's a step by step process.
context: It’s British Columbia. Why not put it in the headline, cbs news? >
  
  probably because people are not likely to know BC by name >
  
  Really? It's home to over 5 million people. If people say Queensland, or New South Wales, or Oaxaca, or Bavaria, or Sicily, I know where those places are. Is Canada just an especially unknown place? This seems surprising. >
  
  A lot of people won't know where those places are either. >
  
  A lot of people are just self centered and assume that everyone has the same perspective that they do. How many people have heard of Wuhan before 2019? It’s got a population of 12 million people. >
  
  The audience CBS News caters to however should know something about British Columbia, such as what country it's in. >
  
  CBS caters to anyone with a pulse, it's not some special news organization catering to the geographically minded. The average American has about as much reason to know about British Columbia as knowing about Chiapas, it's just not a topic that comes up in daily life. >
  
  Very interested to see if this works. >
  
  Since 2020 they’ve not been prosecuting minor drug offences.  The only difference is that now police won’t confiscate drugs. >
  
  So it’s not working. >
  
  I work in downtown Surrey, and ANYTHING to help welcome. We have so many deaths in that area. >
  
  How will this reduce deaths ? >
  
  Other countries have seen a lot of success with this method. I dont know Canada's and assume its similar.
  The idea is to remove barriers to recovery as well as making it safe for people to consume.
  Things like more pure drugs (not cut with anything dangerous), clean needles, lightening stigma, a support network, and doctors on site. >
  
  How will it enable more pure drugs ? [ I assume they already have a clean needle program - most places have]  - thre is no mention of support network or doctors on sites. The Portuguese model works-ish because the users are persuaded to join a rehab. Once they are in rehab - they cannot leave/just sign themselves out >
  
  Well they would have to supply it. IIRC  Switzerland saw success with treatments like this, but Im not well versed in the details. >
  
  I hope it helps make it better, because it sure can't make it any worse. >
  
  Hold my beer.... >
  
  “Canada province”. Just say the name of the province. >
  
  It sounds like a medieval person talking to someone during their travels. "I come from Canada province." >
  
  Worked in Portugal >
  
  Portugal also has mandatory treatment, however.  Canada will not.  There's little change in "help" for those that will use this system, Portugal has tons.  So, im skeptical, but I suppose we'll see! >
  
  Their "dissuasion commissions" made up of lawyers and social workers do not have the power to mandate compulsory treatment. They either recommend treatment or community service for addicts and if they refuse the commission can issue a sanction such a fine or taking away personal possessions.
  Authorities can't forcibly drag addicts into treatment but once they voluntarily consent to treatment they have conditions for release, you can't just check yourself out any time if you have a history of overdosing. Apparently 85% of their addicts voluntarily agree to treatment when asked to by a dissuasion commission. >
  
  
  Authorities can't forcibly drag addicts into treatment
  
  How else would you describe court ordered rehab? >
  
  Addicts are not automatically criminals and can not be given “court ordered rehab” which is an option for those convicted of trafficking, not possession, with sentences that can partly be served in rehab instead of jail. >
  
  Just decriminalizing is not enough, rehabilitation centers should be opened in numbers . >
  
  They decriminalized possession, but kept the punishments for distribution. So drug quality will remain the same, similar number of people will likely use (if not slightly more that just feared the penalties), cops will return drugs to people rather than confiscating them, and the number of deaths will drop?! What?
  If you're gonna decriminalize it, at least provide a safe source for it?? >
  
  There is at least one store illegally selling illicit drugs, which is being ignored by the police. >
  
  That’s not enough. You need hundreds and stringent testing of all the drugs they sell. Otherwise there’s no point to decriminalize possession. Not gonna save any lives.