Consequentalism says that the value of an action depends solely on its consequences. What does that have to do with responsibility for one’s actions? And even if there is a connection, consequentalism is hardly a philosophy widespread enough that Meta-Gumble can make sweeping statements about what generally is or isn’t assumed. If nothing else, the entire justice system with jails and courts certainly aims to force people with bad intentions to take responsibility for their actions.
Well doing something bad is irresponsible, isn’t it?
Although the common sense view says that all people are free moral agents whatever their actions are like, bad actions are really unavoidable and so there is no real freedom or responsibility.
Conversely good actions are avoidable and so there is freedom and responsibility associated with the agent.
How many times have you heard someone say of a kid who did something wrong: “He didn’t know any better - its not his fault.”. While an adult commiting a similar offence would be held responsible.
Well people who do good are the adults, and those who do wrong wrong are the children.
Of course the catch is that there aren’t actually any adults - only big kids. 
Sorry Priceguy, that link was provided for general edification here, not as a response to your specific previous post.