Sixty years ago in 1948, the United Nations enshrined the right of responsibility as article 29 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As many people today seem to want to avoid as much responsibility as possible, why would the UN consider this a right to be protected?

Perhaps the Dog Owners’ Liability Act, passed here in Ontario in 2005, can give us some insight into the UN’s decision.

At first glance, the government of Ontario has forced responsibility onto dog owners. But because the law tries to define it in a narrow-minded way and then provides severe penalties for non-compliance, it becomes unwieldy, unworkable and subject to arbitrary and draconian enforcement.

For instance, because I own a dog that may be considered to be a "pit bull", I must keep her leashed and muzzled at all times when she is not in my own fenced-in yard (if I have one) or my home. So the law says I am being "irresponsible" when I let Hunny off the leash to play fetch, whether in a park, a remote area, or in a leash-free dog park. Letting her get the exercise she needs. Giving her the opportunity to socialize with other people and dogs. Allowing her some time to be a dog.

On the other hand, a person who keeps his dog chained in the back yard, unsocialized, unexercised and unloved, is being "responsible" under the law because he has "taken steps to protect the public from being bitten".

I leave it to the reader to determine for himself or herself from which dog the public would more likely need to be protected.

Yes, there are irresponsible dog owners, just as there exist irresponsible parents. But responsibility cannot be enforced by government decree and it is naïve and irresponsible for our politicians to think they can do so. In fact, most of our laws are brought into being in an attempt to correct irresponsible or criminal behavior. Do the laws change this behavior? That is highly unlikely; after all, the irresponsible or criminal person is not the one who obeys laws.

Should I be held accountable for my dog’s actions? Absolutely! In fact, that is all I am asking when I want the law changed. Give me back the responsibility for my actions and my dog’s actions – responsibility that has been taken away from me by an uncaring, unthinking government edict. I would have no problem with a law that made me accountable for any harm or damage caused by my dog. But placing severe restrictions on me and my dog only because of her physical appearance, when these are unwarranted by our actions, is patently unfair.

I have been chastised by an animal control officer for being "irresponsible" (the exact word used) when I was playing fetch with Hunny in a completely isolated area; irresponsible because I was not complying with the letter of the law.

Hunny and I have established a unique bond in the four years we have been together. Whether on or off the leash, she is completely under control. When she plays fetch, she is so focused on retrieving the ball that nothing can distract her. Other people have tried to get her to accept treats while she is playing and are surprised to discover that she is not interested. Yet she can still be brought to a dead stop with a "Stay!" command. (Extremely useful to keep her away from traffic or on those rare occasions when she decides to chase a skunk!) She comes when called and is under effective control at all times.

I am the one who feeds Hunny. I ensure she gets the exercise she needs. I control her behavior, disciplining her when necessary. I allow her to socialize with other people and dogs, ensuring other people are not uncomfortable around her. I give her love and affection. These are my responsibilities.

Governments can do none of these things. Governments cannot be responsible; they can only pass laws. Police cannot be responsible; they can only enforce laws. And when these laws take responsibility away from the individual, we end up with a society composed of people who want someone else to take care of everything for them.

Perhaps the United Nations was cognizant of the quote from George Bernard Shaw when it made responsibility one of the Universal Rights in its declaration. "Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."

For when responsibility is taken away from the individual, liberty is to that degree lost.