I think that laws should be enacted to make the risk of owning a pit bull (or any dog prone to attack) VERY high. If your pit bull attacks someone, its $100,000 and 10 years in jail. You can then decide if the dog you have is likely to get you into that kind of trouble.
As far as: Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science found that 41% of shelter workers are willing to lie about pit bull breed identification to try to re-home more pit bulls.
This happened to us. My wife and kids went to a shelter to adopt a dog. The brought home a nice Staffordsire Terrier puppy as defined by the shelter. I took one look and said that guy is going back. We ended up with a Newfoundland. It was a great trade. Nicest dog in the world. I miss him. As an aside we also had a German Shepherd/Chow mix. She was our guard dog. She was very smart and seemed to know what to do in any situation. And yes, she was not afraid to bite.
I have no issue with a ban for pits for the same reason I have no issue with bans on owning lions, tigers, bears, venomous snakes, and other potentially dangerous animals that are difficult, if not impossible, to domesticate. Sometimes, the welfare of the community has to be considered.
With advances in DNA testing the concern about identifying pit bulls is becoming moot.
I think that laws should be enacted to make the risk of owning a pit bull (or any dog prone to attack) VERY high. If your pit bull attacks someone, its $100,000 and 10 years in jail. You can then decide if the dog you have is likely to get you into that kind of trouble.
Not necessarily mutually exclusive with a ban. A ban could easily (and I don't know about the provisions of the Springfield ban) allow for ownership of pit bulls by those who prove competence in handling potentially dangerous dogs. Once someone proves responsible, competent, and maintaining proper facilities, a license to own a pit bull could be issued with the provision that such insurance must be maintained and that any failure to properly handle the dog could result in criminal prosecution. Why should a potentially-dangerous dog breed be handled any differently than any other potentially-dangerous exotic pet?
A bit confused by your anecdote.
They did not lie.
A Staffordshire Bull Terrier IS a pit-bull Terrier, full and clear.
A PBT is a TYPE, not a breed only. It covers several breeds including some very large ones. The deception is those who KNOW damn well PBT covers a whole range, but try to tell you only those with the “pit-bull Terrier” words in the name are that. Trust me, an “American bulldog” is fully bully/PBT. The Operative is they were bred using bulldogs and PBTs of some fighting type.
In fact, some dogs fall under the fighting type category, but the fight has been bred out of them. Thus, I generally trust Bull Terriers, Bulldogs and Boston Terriers.
Anyway, just have to go over that. Your people were not lying. You just need to know a Staff is a PBT.