Pit bull ownership should be regulated by the state.

First of all I would like to apologize for forfeiting my 2nd round, which didnt happen, because your so called "logic and good sense" has stunned me to silence but rather because I had some techical issues with my computer. I will now answer to your 2nd round. "well you are right that they are popular. they are almost as popular as Labradors and Retrievers. Yet you completely ignore the fact that this one, single breed. is responsible for 62.3% of ALL dog related deaths." First of all, the chart you posted to confirm your thesis represents only the dog related deaths in the US and not "ALL dog related deaths". "your claim that they are well mannered in laboratory type settings makes no difference when it comes to the fact that they are responsible for nearly 2/3rds of dog related deaths. These studies may very well be true. but i am not dealing with studies. I am dealing with what has actually happened in the real world." I dont deny the fact that they are responsible for nearly 2/3rds of dog related deaths in the US. With my claim I wanted to highlight something I failed to illustrate enough in my first round. This statistic shows, that the owners are responsible for the high number of pitbull related deaths in the US. This also answers your question "Then why arent Golden Retrievers even on the map when it comes to dog attacks?". It is because Golden Retrievers arent trained to attack. People who want tough dogs that can be violant and attack will train their dog to attack and often they will train a pitbull because pitbulls already have a reputation for being dangerous. A regulation of pitbull ownership by the state is pointless, because people who want to have a dangerous dog and want to train it to attack will just buy other dog breeds such as german shepherds to do the same thing. "or are you willing to admit that study was either deeply flawed and does not reflect reality or was perhaps totally fabricated by the pro pit bull crowed?" I highly doubt that the American Temperament Test Society, Inc. is part of a "pro pitbull crowd". "you must be a liberal. Only a liberal would try to silence opposition by screaming racism." Demanding a regulation of a specific race is by definition racism. By the way I am libertarian/anarchocapitalist. "Perhaps I would require it for rottweilers as well. they account for 11.7% of deaths. but since pit-bulls are 6X as dangerous I thought that would be a good start." Dont you see the mistake in your thinking. Dog owners who want to have dangerous dogs will just adjust to your regulation and buy other breeds and train them to be dangerous. Do you seriously want to regulate every breed with the potential of harming someone? That is insane. "You must be completely off your rocker. first of all. If you already own a pit-bull and it has already bitten somebody. not only should the animal be euthanized, you should be charged with assault, possibly with a deadly weapon. You think they should be just slapped on the wrist and let go to have their dog maul a few more people? no. this class would be for fine upstanding dog owners with no history of having ill trained dogs." I never said that your course should be a replacement for charges and other consequences. It should merely be a tool to ensure that one person wont screw a dog a secont time. Although this is completely irrelevant for this debate. "at this point I would like to add that I think ALL dog owners, cat owners, pig owners, you name it, should have to sign a similar document stating that the actions of their pet are solely their responsibility in ALL legal matters and will be treated as if they did the action themselves. BUT as far as dogs go only with the pit bull would it be necessary to have this class since they are so dangerous. 62.3% people. come on." First of all I dont think you should have to sign a document to have this applied to you. It should be standard. Additionally I dont understand why you only find it necessary for pitbulls. Should the owner of a rottweiler which has bitten someone be treated differently than the owner of a pitbull? "this is not unprecedented. There are licensing processes for many dangerous animals." For this debate it is irrelevant if this is precedented or not, because we are debating about how it should be and not what fits best in the existing system. All in all I think it is pretty clear now that regulating one breed inflicting many fatalities is not going to help and is only going to increase the fatalities inflicted by other breeds since people who want to own a dangerous dog will just train other breeds to attack and be violent.