[LawTalkingGuy]

As a part-time resident of two major drug cities I've been looking for that article. I just have to read between the lines and contrast it with the results we get from the same words.

It should be obvious when reading a story about Portugal that they couldn't get the junkie to stay in rehab voluntarily, so obviously they don't mean "no potential of a criminal charge at all".

Whereas in Vancouver they specifically changed the rules so you can buy and do drugs in front of the police, pass out and almost die - get revived and smoke more drugs, and have no charges, no special detainment, nothing.

[mrguyorama]

"I have no source or evidence so just keep taking my word at face value"

[LawTalkingGuy]

My source is my eyes. I drove through the local drug camp recently and saw a dealer dealing within a stone's throw from police in their car, and junkies passed out just steps from him. There's a ton of evidence, but you could search for it if you really wanted and you didn't.

What I haven't found is a single short and simple article that explains for ... people like you, that what Vancouver/Seattle/Portland/SF and Portugal mean by decriminalization is not the same.

[mylidlpony]

Your eyes have no value in this conversation. If you can only back up your claims with "trust me bro", they are irrelevant.

[LawTalkingGuy]

What issue do you have that makes you incapable of searching for references and yet still able to whine about that incapability online? And what are you actually looking for a reference for? That there are drug encampments? That some cities have literally made it legal to buy and sell Fentanyl?

You have been told something exists, that's 95% of the way there. Now go to a search engine and type 'vancouver drug decriminalization' and 'Portugal drug treatment' and read about the issue.

You're trying so very hard to use me to justify your ignorance and to be insulting in the process.

[mylidlpony]

I googled the phrase 'Portugal drug treatment' and found out what I was suspecting from the start - which is, everything I saw previously was correct and they indeed decriminalized all drugs up to certain weight and still jail dealers. This goes against the claims that you previously made that they did not have a decriminalization, and the next one about criminal record also doesn't make any sense in this context - what would the criminal record be, a gram of weed?

[LawTalkingGuy]

Okay, now that you did some work and have questions I can help.

> what would the criminal record be

Public intoxication, possession, etc.

> everything I saw previously was correct and they indeed decriminalized all drugs

They haven't decriminalized public usage. You can have your small amount of drugs if you do it in private and are discrete.

> This goes against the claims that you previously made that they did not have a decriminalization

It's a system of not giving you a criminal record by using the mere threat of the criminal justice system for force you to voluntarily enter rehab. So you have to do what they say but then they don't label you a criminal and they sort of pretend you went into treatment on your own.

In the words of the guy who invented and runs their system:

"There are a lot of myths around the Portuguese model that, for instance, we just liberalize you do whatever you want, nobody cares ... It's important to say that using drugs in Portugal is still prohibited under the law ... If somebody in Portugal starts injecting heroin in public [...] he would be arrested and conducted to the police station. The substances would be apprehended. If they have more than the amount that is calculated on the basis of personal use he undergoes criminal procedures as before. If he has less than that amount he would be intimated to present himself to the commission. It's not a court, it's not a formal institution, but he will be confronted to discuss his drug use with professionals. It's mandatory, with a little bit of muscle you have them in front of you. We can try to understand what is happening with this person. For each hundren people that is conducted through those commissions, ten of them are problematic users." -- João Goulão - National drug coordinator for Portugal - https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16412220666858455...

This next part is where you have to read between the lines a bit. They don't come right out and say that they can't arrest junkies for junking in public - you have to understand that they wouldn't pass a bylaw to make it happen if they didn't need to which means that in the rest of the cities they would not arrest and move them proactively.

Here's a typical article about Vancouver BC's decriminalization - https://archive.is/f2Q0k

"Police forces across British Columbia are finalizing training on new drug laws that will limit or entirely cease their interactions with people who use drugs as the province becomes the first in Canada to decriminalize simple possession."

"While many police departments have in recent years moved away from arresting and recommending charges for possession alone, officers will now also stop confiscating illegal drugs"

"at least one city is preparing to introduce a new bylaw that would re-engage police if people use in certain public spaces."

From which we learn that 1) they won't be able to arrest at all for drug possession, 2) they won't even be able to confiscate dangerous drugs, 3) they won't even arrest people for public use (unless cities pass a bylaw overriding the province.)

In Portugal they will arrest, and will confiscate, and will use legal powers (if you push them to it) to detain you. In Vancouver they can not arrest, can not confiscate, and will not engage the criminal justice system at all.

Portugal is saving lives by using the courts, Vancouver is getting worse with every loosening. Seattle and SF are roughly the same as Vancouver.