Sorry, hit send too early on the first letter. I'm going to do this one in two parts because it's too long:

We should be looking at more statistically significant factors than breed to determine our course of action here. A disproportionate number of pit bulls are abused, which leads to poor temperaments in *some* of these dogs, in spite of the fact that the breed scores very highly on temperament tests in general, when you're not talking about the most abused individuals. All this debate about whether pits are inherently more vicious or more likely to not back down is very emotionally charged and borders on superstition rather than actual statistics, which don't even put pits in the top five breeds of likely biters. I recognize also that my position - that pits are wonderful dogs, often in spite of horrific abuse, is also emotional and wont to emotional and anecdotal arguments. I think such arguments are valid, and also that there are rational - statistical - arguments showing that pits aren't the vicious characatures of violence and chaos that some of the commenters have portrayed them to be.

But leaving those arguments aside, let's look at what really leads to the problems people are ostensibly trying to address with breed-specific legislation, and the issues I think are important surrounding pit bulls. In no particular order, these are: homeless animals, abuse to pit bulls, other breeds, and other animals, dog bites to humans, and "euthanasia" - i.e. killing of a massive number of dogs (disproportionately pits) in shelters.

Dog bites to humans seem to be the most frequent issue coming up surrounding this issue. We know certain things make dog bites much more likely than other things: chaining a dog makes the dog several times more likely to bite, as does having an intact male dog. Dogs that are off-leash or wandering because they were improperly contained are also more likely to bite. Dogs that are unsocialized, abused, neglected, or fought are also more likely to bite.

1. We should start implementing laws against chaining dogs - dogs are pack animals and they are territorial animals. Leaving a dog on a chain for prolonged periods of time is a perfect formula for creating a vicious (and very unhappy) dog. There are nonprofit groups working on that issue - trying to get municipalities and counties to institute anti-tethering laws and enforce the laws in the areas where they exist. This is for the welfare of the dog and to reduce the risk to humans. Incidentally, dog fighters--especially of the more organized variety like the Vick-type fighters--use tethering as a way to isolate the animal and make him or her mean. Anti-tethering laws, if they were enforced, would target likely biters in general, including dog fighters.

2. Leash laws should be enforced. There are many enclosed dog parks to take your dogs if they need to run around. When walking on the sidewalk, leash your dog. My pit mix has never injured another dog, but essentially every time I have felt uncomfortable about my dog with another dog is when my dog is on a leash and someone else's dog runs up to him. Create more fenced in areas for dogs to exercise in parks and enforce leash laws, simply.

3. Spay/neuter and breeder permit regulations should be in place on all dogs. This goes to the overpopulation issue as well, but unneutered male dogs are very likely to bite, and to roam (also a factor for likely biting). Some places have steep discounts on licenses for altered animals. That is a good start, but underground fighters and other abusers don't have an incentive to license their dogs or bring them to vets in the current regulatory climate, so simple spay/neuter requirments would help reduce aggression, provide a basis for police to find a violation on a potentially aggressive dog, and reduce breeding within these fighting communities and elsewhere. At the same time, anyone who wishes to breed dogs should be required to have a permit. Permits should be given based on meaningful things like ability to care for dogs, expertise on dogs, and of course, no previous record of abuse to animals. I personally think there is no need to be breeding animals while we are in the midst of an overpopulation crisis, but I understand that is a very controversial viewpoint, and I think this is a very reasonable compromise.

4. Registration/licensing requirements, plus microchipping. If a dog fighter or other abuser has an unregistered dog, and there is a law in that jurisdiction requiring licensing, that would be grounds for fines/seizing of the animal, or whatever other remedies the law provided. We should have to register our dogs the same way we register cars, and require those "titles" to be transfered if the animal changes hands. And enforce those laws. In addition to being a disincentive for clandestine operations, abused animals could be traced back to the person who should be responsible for him or her. That's how you target the "bad owners" rather than punishing the dog, who already likely has a pretty rough life and bleak prospects for the future. This would also make people accountable for roaming animals, and incentivize good fencing and disincentivize abandoning animals.