That is crap. No one breed is any more vicious then any other breed. In Iowa in the last three years labs have been the biggest biters.(daily gate June 1rst, 2007)And yet pitbulls are banned in many towns in Iowa. Another thing out of about 52million dogs in the us, 4.8million are a breed of pitbull. So there is likely to be more attacks from a group of dog that is more common. You also need to realize that pitbulls are a couple of diffrent breeds that have been labeled pitbull. If we did this with say retriever, or terrier breeds the attacks would seem like more because there are several breeds in one. This is one reason it seems pitbulls attack more. When in all actuallity they attack no more then any other breed. Unless you have scientific prof that pitbulls are more fierce by nature, rather then up bringing then it is faulse to make the statements you have made here. If we can do this to dog breeds then whats next. Because maybe theres a race of people that has a higher crime rate then others. Should we ban them to. Think about this.

I will agree to a statement like "to a high extent any breed of dog can be raised to be a sweet loving animal that under normal circumstances would never bite a person or attack and kill other dogs" I have repeatedly encountered Pits a and Rots that were nothing but fun loving pooches more likely to submit to another aggressive dog even and wanting nothing more from a stranger than to be accepted as a friend ... and maybe get a belly rub in the bargain.

But as owner of two Large Male German Shepherd Dogs plus an elderly small Australian terrier (picture Dorothy's Toto for a good description) I have to admit to coming in contact with an overly high percentage of aggressive Pit's and Rots and those at dog parks of all places! So far none of these animals have exhibited what I felt to be an intent to kill and I assume very very very few owner of THOSE types would have the audacity to bring them to a dog park ...more than one time at least becuase of they did, they would no doubt lose their animal and make them self a target of a lawsuit with many witnesses against their dog. But these others I mention while not killing anything, just are not welcome to play with my animals (nor is ANY breed that becomes aggressive) I just see so many that I have to wonder if it isn't much more important for these breeds to have the right owner than say a golden retriever or a bull dog or something. I think also the fact that Pits have well over double the natural ABILITY to kill compared to the average dog that it makes a case for having law in place to restrict who can own these animals. Obviously MY GSDs falling somewhat in the same category except the breed has a better record and certainly less lethal bite, are a breed that should not be owned by those without understanding of the breed and total commitment to ensuring the animal is raised and trained to be fully trustworthy among man or beast. So my idea is rather than to blanket outlaw this breed or that breed, instead make would be owners jump through hoops to obtain one and then be required to submit the animal at proper intervals for certification of temperament ... and THIS always accompanied by DNA sample collection to prevent those that would submit another animal in their pet's stead. I personally would welcome such laws with my own animals especially if it lowered my homeowner insurance. Until I was recently bitten on one occasion and saw my own animal attacked on three separate occasions I would not likely be thinking this way ... but like it or not things are what they are ... it is totally unreasonable that people be just allowed to harbor dogs bent on attacking no matter what command is shouted their way ... OF COURSE sooner or later these animals WILL get loose and WILL have their way ..that is the proverbial DUHHHH!!! Therefore anyone who denies this by keeping a dog like this is in SPITE of what is DUHHHH! is behaving in a heartless criminal manner toward their neighbor. There is sort of a flip side to this whole issue too because there are people (and even sometimes the animals belonging to such) that seem to do everything in their fircken power to inflame otherwise stable dogs and their owners. While many times the law might side with them finally, woe to them if I am on the jury! Everyone has an ethical obligation to live and let live with their neighbors at least to the extent comfortably possible ... that COULD mean staying away from animals you are petrified of rather than knowingly putting yourself into a situation you have a history of panicking and running both of which will often excite an animal to give chase especially a young dog ... if it looks like a game they are all about signing on ... so a person runs from a yearling large dog for example, the dog gives friendly chase and the whole think ends in tragedy somehow when the panicked one trips and cracks their noggin or whatever ... the dog owner is sued and a totally perplexed pup is torn from the arms of a child that dearly loves him because now there is no insurance available for the family to own a dog. Like i said woe if I am on THAT jury!