BSL.. why or why not?

It seems most of the people I know would argue in favor of BSL because they think that the stats "prove" that certain breeds are more dangerous.  Isn't it just as likely that certain people own these breeds because they are perceived as being tough, loyal, and dangerous?  I swear I see more pit bull or pit bull mixes where the pit is the dominant breed than all other breeds combined! Around here, they are insanely popular and our shelters always have plenty of them.  So say for instance you have a sample group of 20 dog owners and 9 of them own pit bulls and 5 dog have bit a person or another dog.  If one in four dogs bit, then that means the pit bulls in the sample probably bit more than twice as often as any one other breed in the sample.  Yeah I totally made that up, but the point is pits, rotties, and dobes are really popular.  I see labs more than anything, but at least from what I see (not what the AKC says are the most registered breeds, b/c let's face it many casual pet owners don't register their dog with a club) pits might be a close second around here.  In some areas of town, you will ONLY find pits, rotties, dobes, and boxers.

So, another reason I'm against BSL is that I don't think any agency so far has done the right research and gathered the appropriate data supposedly proving that when taking into account the popularity of each breed, the pits are more dangerous.  How could anyone think they can conclude this when so many incidents are never reported?  Also, IMO a lab that is aggressive but was luckily retrained before it attacked has as much potential to be dangerous than a pit who was roaming and did attack because no one was there to restrain it.  I've seen a lot of "almosts" that have had me just as scared as some actual attacks.

DPU....the PB Amstaff and several other breeds are banned in the UK and Europe in part and have been for a bit now. Interestingly in England the root (in part) of the PB...the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (an English breed referred to there as "the nanny dog")..has NOT been banned. Only the "American" Staffordshire Terrier. I always thought that was interesting!
 
ETA: Interesting link!
[linkhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2499649.stm]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2499649.stm[/link]

Corgis have not been banned, last I checked, but must be MUZZLED in Italy as 'dangerous' dogs. Just goes to show how dumb breed bans are- once it starts, where does it stop? 

DPU....the PB Amstaff and several other breeds are banned in the UK and Europe in part and have been for a bit now. Interestingly in England the root (in part) of the PB...the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (an English breed referred to there as "the nanny dog")..has NOT been banned. Only the "American" Staffordshire Terrier. I always thought that was interesting!

I've read a few times before that a lot of people (mistakenly) define the amstaffs/pits as the version that are bred to fight and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier as the version bred for conformation and companionship.  People argue that "pit bull" implies the dog has fighting in it's genes and SBT means it doesn't.

[>:]