In my exp, pit bulls, mastiffs, etc are not the most likely breeds to attack. Their attacks can be the most devastating though.

Let's not forget that there are entire breeds of dogs who were created for the purposes of guarding territory and livestock and happen to look cute.

Why ragebait comment? Pitbulls are large dogs. When large dogs are untrained and attack, they do much more harm than smaller dogs. They are more dangerous than smaller dogs. They're not more dangerous than other large dogs. Mastiffs and german shepherds and scottish wolfhounds are also just as lethal and terrifying when untrained, and that is a people problem, not a breed problem. Stop trying to demonize dog breeds and direct whatever angst and anger you have at the real issue - people need to be better at training and socializing their animals. People need to be held accountable for animals that harm other people.

In general, pitbulls and bully breeds make up around 6% of the population of dogs and account for 22% of attacks. This isn't inherent to the breed, it's inherent to shitty dog owners wanting a badass looking big dog and not investing the necessary time and effort in training and socializing their pet. This leads to batshit breed restrictions and a perpetual ignorant narrative that demonizes different breeds of dogs. Demonize ignorant pet owners who purchase the animal for appearance or status without putting in the work and taking responsibility for the dog.

Essentially, dog breed doesn't impact behavior directly. It impacts their physiology, which impacts how they can behave. A well trained pitbull, or poodle, or shepherd, or collie, or malinois are equally unlikely to attack unprovoked. The point is the training, of which socialization is a big part.

Untrained, unsocialized dog attacks are about as antisocial as drunk driving. It doesn't make sense to focus on the model of car the drunk was driving. It doesn't make sense to focus on the breed of the dog shitty owners allowed to attack.