I can break it down for you like this, and you can't say anything about this comparison no matter what you do.
Wanna bet?

Let's see some nonsense, shall we?
Both of these are dangerous things in life controled by people. Don't give me that "a gun can't walk off and kill someone", cause a dog can't either.
I didn't think I'd have to be the one to break it to you, but strap that helmet on a little bit tighter, Tommy, cuz here it comes: dogs have legs, and CAN just "walk off and kill someone"! *GASP* OH NOES! I just demolished your premise by pointing out......basic anatomy of canines? Jeez, try making 'em a bit tougher next time

The owner is in control of it's dog and gun and if the owner is not responsible people will die just the same.
If the gun owner leaves his gun in the yard, there IS a chance that someone will come by and kill someone with it. There is also a chance that the DOG will ALSO kill someone who comes by. The difference is that the gun won't leave the yard
of its own volition and kill someone else, which can and DOES happen with the dog.
For the record, I'm not for banning ownership of the animals, but I DO like this idea:
Perhaps pits should not be banned but regulated like owning a big cat or other exotics. People would still own them illegally but at least there would be some control.
Tommy, if you seriously don't get the concept Pat is pointing out to you with the Puma/Pit Bull comparison, you haven't ever seen a puma, nor did you even do a cursory investigation. The comparison is not only valid, but a pretty damn good one. You can't make it INvalid by saying "nuh uh, it's not even close, because one's a WILD animal, but the dog is a DOMESTICATED animal". He covered that. You're simply playing third-grade rules. Doody head.