Australia has a law that requires a 30-day quarantine of incoming pets to ensure that they do not have Lyme Disease that could be introduced into the local animal population. Because of this law, people who like to travel with their pets typically end up smuggling their pets into the country. Some argue that if the law does not exist, there would be no reason for people to smuggle their pets into the country. And since the most likely source of a Lyme Disease outbreak in Australia is a smuggled pet, the danger of a Lyme Disease outbreak would be reduced if the quarantine law is abolished. Which of the following is the best statement of the flaw in the argument above? 1. The likelilhood of a rables outbreak decreases if the quarantine law is abolished
2. The quarantine law forces people to actually break the law and smuggle their pets.
3. Pets with rabies can easily enter Australia if the law was abolished.