This is why I object strenuously to laws that are only occasionally enforced. When 90% of laws are stupid nitpicking BS that are only enforced if you piss off an officer, serious laws seem frivolous as well. People don't know which ones to take seriously.
Laws shouldn't be like spaghetti, thrown at a wall to see which ones stick, and only occasionally enforced. They should be rare, specific, with a clear intent, and enforced as best as possible. We need to get rid of all the chaff and re-write existing laws to match case history with clear reasoning for each one attached. People shouldn't need a law degree and 10 years of litigation experience just to know how to follow the law.
Clearly you have never traveled to Australia. They rigorously check incoming passengers for food and other undeclared organic material, as invasive species are a huge problem. Every time I've come in from an international flight in Australia, they have had trained dogs checking baggage. If the passenger had declared it, they probably would have avoided the fine entirely. Don't try to evade the rules at border crossings by lying or failing to disclose -- it's never worth it.
> If the passenger had declared it, they probably would have avoided the fine entirely
They definitely would not have been fined. Declaring you have something is essentially saying "Look I have this, is it allowed?" if its not allowed they can safely destroy it.
Usually they wont give a fine like this unless there is very wilful attempt to lie and conceal the item, or this is not the first time.
I meant that this law is serious and strenuously enforced, while a hundred other laws will be happily ignored in the meantime by both law enforcement and law breakers alike. How do people know which laws they should follow and which are harmless? At first appearance, a person carrying a cooked hamburger into an airport is probably fine right? But it turns out this is one of the serious ones that NEEDs to be followed and is enforced strictly!
If we didn't have all the stupid nit pick laws that aren't enforced, then this one would stand out as a serious one.
The article presents the facts as the traveler is coming from Bali and did not declare their food, Bali is currently experiencing an FMD outbreak, and the cost of containing an FMD outbreak in Australia could top 80 billion dollars.
You can certainly argue those points, but trying to present this as 'random' is disingenuous, at best.
I don't mean that the law this person broke is enforced randomly, but other laws in general. If you have to keep in mind what laws are breakable and which aren't then you are going to occasionally break an important one like this that is heavily enforced.
Laws shouldn't be like spaghetti, thrown at a wall to see which ones stick, and only occasionally enforced. They should be rare, specific, with a clear intent, and enforced as best as possible. We need to get rid of all the chaff and re-write existing laws to match case history with clear reasoning for each one attached. People shouldn't need a law degree and 10 years of litigation experience just to know how to follow the law.