This whole phenom of folks acquiring 'bad' dogs is the result of an emasculated populace where 'the state' has decided what you can and cannot do ie. self-defense which leaves you limited options, one of which is to acquire a pit bull (rather than carry a loaded gun and do 5-10 for possession)
As a contractor, I'm required to maintain a million dollar liability insurance policy (up to 3 million per occurance) should someone be harmed by my work. I see no reason at all to exempt pit owners (and any dog with pit blood) from such an insurance requirement. Let the risks associated with this breed be allocated to the owners according to the costs the market will determine. For a couple of hundred bucks a month, they can enjoy the 'companionship' of their pit, while mauling victims will have access to funds needed for reconstructive surgery, pain and suffering, trauma, etc.
I had a co-worker who inherited a house from her mother. She had a pit bull for a pet and the insurance company did’nt want to insure her unless she paid a higher premium so she dropped the insurance instead of getting rid of the dog. Months later a tornado knocked a tree onto the house and ruined it. No insurance,no house but she still had the dog.