What im trying to get accross is how to best deal with pit bulls not whether they are dangerous. I'm not disputing that there have been alot of attacks I just question the way you all want to go about dealing with it. My analogy to pools was to demonstrate how that issue was dealt with after the 1950's saw a huge surge in pools. Of course along with the surge came tons of children drowing.
What they ended up having was a doctrine called the attractive nusciance. It says that kids will be drawn to certain things that are enticing to them. property owners have to take all reasonable steps to try and make the property safe. So people with pools that don't have a seperate fence around a pool, don't have the pool covered can be in big trouble if a kid jumps the fence and drowns, even if you have told the kid not to do it.
Dogs have also been shown to be an attractive nusciance. Which is why if some kid sticks a hand through your gate and it gets bit off you can be held liable for it. Farm equipment, discarded appliances also are included in this type of thing.
I think people who own breeds such as Pit Bulls, Rotts, Cane Corso, Presa Canrio, Tosa Inu, etc should have to have an area to keep dog where it can't get out. That would mean things like exceptionally tall fences, enclosed dog runs, redundancy in fences etc etc. Then also maybe make a law at the state levels that require the owners of breeds deemed dangerous take their dogs to a certified trainer for a certian amount of time(I'd say like 20 half hour sessions), be over 21, not be a felon, not be an illegal alien, etc etc. I t would add to govt which I don't like, but also it gives a way for responsible people to keep their pets.