[GMMAC]

"Now which breed has a worse mauling record than APBT's?"

Unless you know of statistics backed up by 'doggie dna tests', there's no valid answer to your question. Any I've seen lump together many supposedly 'similar' breeds as well as dogs which, in someone's judgement, look a certain way.

Additionally, I'm unaware of any which correlate numbers of attacks with the overall numbers out there of the particular type of dog.

As examples, are German Shepherds - which rank fairly high on some lists - really a verifiable menace or are there simply a lot of them out there?

An average Akita is roughly twice the size of most 'pit bull' type dogs and could likely easily eat one for breakfast. They come up on some lists of dangerous dogs but not all, because there's not really that many of them around.

Again, the more such reasonable questions that can be raised, seemingly, the more valid cause there is to be using governmental resources to go after specific negligent dog owners.

Ever notice how often, after an attack by any sort of dog, the neighbors and/or witnesses have stories to tell about there having been a long-standing problem with the dog's owner which the authorities did nothing to address? I doubt all that many dog attacks by any breed come out of a clear blue sky.

[Wristpin]

Oh I see....only qualified expert Pit Bull owners can identify Pit Bulls, despite the fact that Pits are overepresented in Animal control visits, in the shelters and being shot by police. The authorities are wholly unfamiliar with them.

It's a mythical problem and everyone should run out a buy a Pit Bull...Are you a breeder btw?

[Vicomte13]

Doggie DNA tests won't give you an objective differentiation of breeds either.