I reiterate:
“Premiums paid to State Farm by owners of other breeds accordingly subsidize owners of the most dangerous breeds.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are correct in that State Farm will insure pit bulls and the liability thereof on homeowner’s insurance. Aside from an insurance company named something like “Dangerous Dog Insurance”, they are the ONLY large and well-known insurance company that will. Most others specifically exclude pit bulls and a couple of other breeds, and keeping these breeds can potentially void your insurance.
State Farm insures every breed of dog, but the non-dangerous-dog customers are subsidizing the rates for dangerous dog owners.
Interesting.
The most dangerous breeds being larger dogs who are accordingly more capable of causing serious injury, as opposed to chihuahuas, dachshunds, and the like.
In any event, as the HP article mentioned, State Farm gathers more data than the U.S. government, and while subsidies might occur based on the criteria I cited above, there certainly doesn't appear to be any evidence that State Farm—who one would presume has some of the best data—is convinced that Pit Bulls specifically represent a greater threat (as individual dogs) than any of the other "most dangerous" (largest/muscular) breeds.
Again, the fact that State Farm Insurance doesn't single out the dreaded Pit Bull breed for any "special handling" speaks volumes, and the reason is very likely based of the fact that other large and/or muscular dog breeds attack at comparatively similar rates—doubtless supported by the industry-leader's own extensive and impeccable data...