Preventing law-abiding homeowners from obtaining insurance is not the answer to the problem of dog bites. Better and more effective alternatives exist so that there is no need for insurance exclusions. Part I of this article reviews the rise and fall of Breed Specific legislation. It discusses how highly-publicized dog attacks resulted in the legislature’s quick-fix solution now commonly known as Breed Specific Legislation. It then addresses how this legislation did not achieve its desired goals and the current trend, evidenced by a growing minority of states, to ban Breed Specific Legislation. Part II discusses insurer’s continuing breed based bans and the faulty assumptions that insurers rely upon to justify these bans. Finally, Part II concludes by identifying more reasoned and effective practices available to insurers.