Firstly, I apologise if I got under your skin on this last night, I didn't mean to make it personal. Secondly, that's an impressive amount of research you've got through, I hope you'll be able to catch up on your sleep! We don't actually disagree on much.
I haven't got time to respond in detail to each of the articles you've quoted or referred to, but your history of the different bull breeds is broadly accurate. As someone who was around when the DDA came in, it was clear that it had little to do with the aggressiveness of pit bulls, but more a knee-jerk politicians' response to one particularly high profile and horrific attack on a young girl. The politicians introduced breed specific legislation that identified four breeds - American Pit Bull Terriers, Japanese Tosas (of which there were only known to be two in the country, owned by Ed Reid in Croydon), Dogo Argentinos and Fila Brasilieros. I don't believe there were any of the last two in the UK and there were no reported attacks by the last three. The government targeted breeds that didn't have the protection of an influential lobby like the Kennel Club, and didn't go for GSDs, Rotties and others because they knew MPs would be lobbied hard. BSL was, in my opinion, the wrong way to go to improve public safety, but it is what we have today.
I'm on record in this thread of clearly stating that staffs can have a higher propensity for aggression towards other dogs, because of their original purpose - and that they require responsible ownership. Owners who are not in control of any dog are a liability, and more so with certain breeds. I've always said that and so your comment below is an unfair and unwarranted characterisation of my position:
I could go on but to be honest I'll be surprised if you bother reading this far after shutting off your brain while repeating "the bad man doesn't like my cute little staffy, it wouldn't hurt a fly".
On the question of dog attacks on humans, it is worth saying that "dog men" (breeders of fighting dogs) used to and continue to cull "man biters" - it is seen as an undesirable trait, as dogs need to be handled in the pit, often by strangers, whilst fighting another dog. Breeders of pit bulls in the 70s and 80s in the UK used to keep GSDs and Rotties to guard their yards, as pits were too easy to steal. All of that said, of course, a human aggressive pit bull, staff or other strong dog is frightening and can cause a lot of damage. It is easy to quote statistics that support your argument, but I agree that there is a higher than average number of attacks on people from pit bulls. I would suggest that these numbers are inflated by a combination of their popularity amongst irresponsible owners (and those who encourage human aggression) as status dogs, the higher likelihood of "pit bull attacks" being reported and an inability of most people to correctly identify a pit bull. Nonetheless, the numbers are not good.
There's a bunch more numbers on that page if you care to read it although it won't back up the lies you've sold yourself.
You may not agree with much of what I say, but I struggle to understand how this comment is helpful. What are the lies you're referring to? In none of my comments last night did I make any claims about the aggression of pit bulls, staffs or anything else.
Which brings us back to where the argument started - whether an American Staffordshire Terrier is a pit bull - and I don't think we are far apart on that. I think you are using term pit bull where I would use bull breed. Bull breed is a term that covers a number of different breeds of dog in the way gun dog might. They include the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, English Bulldog and many others. They are all individual and separate breeds that share some similar traits and some ancestry. If you choose to use pit bull to describe them all, then that is misleading, as is saying they are all effectively the same.
they're the most dangerous type of dog by far
You haven't seen a Caucasian Ovcharka or Kurdish Kangal in the flesh then...
I'm really happy to continue this conversation, but can we do so in good faith and keep the personal insults out of it?