Look, I get it. Warning labels prevent avoidable deaths, and rules like the ones mandating the labeling on the bags are written in someone's blood.

That said, there are billions of us at this point, and there were over a billion at the time of the example we're using. While it may sound callous, a number like dozens against that backdrop is so statistically insignificant that we may want to see how many people might have died as a result of creating and placing millions of liters of warning ink on billions of bags and make sure that didnt have even more lethality.

The point I'm making is that some warnings and protections can be more onerous than they are helpful, and while a child dying or being harmed is tragic, reactionary response worsening conditions for everyone that is still alive can be, too. It is important to carefully measure safety and security against the harms it may cause, or you'll end up with widespread safety bans and everyone rolling around in impermeable bubbles.

I dont know the fine details in Australia's particular case beyond this article and maybe some others I vaguely remember, but it is wise to be very wary of villains wrapping themselves in the "save the children" flag while they strip away people's privacy and security. I have 4 Flock cameras in my neighborhood to "protect the kids", but they're also protecting the brutal social hierarchy, which kills tons of kids.