The common definition of “arbitrary” has a connotation of randomness to it. My point was that this isn't random but directed, and that if you don't understand who those rules serve you'll just end up repeating it in a different form or having the old rule adapted for new purposes, similar to how various measures originally intended to prevent alcohol or drug money being laundered were repurposed as part of the War on Terror but they all stemmed down to the base problem of law enforcement wanting a way to trace previously anonymous cash flows.

Since this was a very vaguely defined claim, it might be more useful if you had something specific to talk about.