Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)

Some of you may know that in 1991, the United Kingdom passed the Dangerous Dogs Act. This act banned ownership of dogo Argentino, fila Brasileiro, Japanese tosa, and pit bull terrier. Never mind that in the UK, the pit bull terrier is not even considered a breed, so banning it was rather problematic. This was going to solve the problem of dog attacks in the United Kingdom, or so the act's proponents claimed.
Now Britain's Liberal Democrats have conducted a statistical survey and found that the number of people visiting the emergency room after a dog attack has risen more than 40 percent over the last 4 years. As in most cases, young children and teenagers are most often the victims of the bites, and in the UK, there is also a strong regional variation. For example, the numbers doubled in London and rose by almost 80 percent in the West Midlands, whereas the East Midlands showed barely any increase.
In London, the response has been surprisingly reasonable - several groups have come together to launch a campaign for responsible dog ownership. If their campaign is effective, it's likely to have much more of an impact on the incidence of dog bites than the banning of specific breeds has.
A lot of dog people support the saying "it's the deed, not the breed," and indeed it should be. Doberman Pinschers were once rather sharp reactive dogs, and they still find their way onto dangerous dog lists, even though breeders have done an excellent job of changing their personalities to be more of a big energetic marshmallow.
I live in the U.S., where we are not supposed to profile anyone even after the terrorist attacks, because it could harm the innocent people who happened to fit the profile. We should exend the same courtesy to our dogs, and judge individual actions rather than a breed and a "dangerous dog" label.