Should Pet Owners be bonded?

Hey, I just tapped into an interesting conversation on a forum in amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/tag/dogs/forum/ref=cm_cd_dp_rt_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1TSBNUMOHYAJN&cdThread=Tx2W6P80KMISFBZ

Dr. Chris C. Pinney initiated the thread by saying that since owning pets is such a huge responsibility maybe owners should be bonded, and the cost of the bond could cover the costs involved if an animal was relinquished at an animal shelter. Maybe the owner would even have difficulty purchasing another bond, which might make it more prohibitive to get a pet unless you were prepared to take care of it.

There were discussions on both sides of the issue, and I don't really know where I stand on this. However, it does bring up a curiosity in me in relation to our responsibility to our dogs it and reminds me of a trip I took to Europe. First of all, the German people would bring their dogs into restaurants. And I heard that you had to take your dog to obedience school as part of the ownership. So there was that image: a properly behaving dog that could go out into society in Germany. When I got off of the train in Italy, it was completely different. The first sight to greet me was a muzzled dog straining at a leash. The much more mellow Italians had much more unruly dogs. And I am sure they would be more likely to be abandoned or relinquished when they got inconvenient.

Does the government need to regulate dog ownership? Would it make a difference? I don't know, but it is an idea worth pondering for sure.