From personal experience we had a german shepherd! I do understand what some of them are like but ours was a sweet heart! Its always a difficult issue as these dogs have such a stigma

I believe ALL of these breeds have the potential to be good companion animals. The pinch is with people who do not train their dogs or socialize them properly. The American Bred Cocker Spaniel held the record number of BITES nationwide for years for Companion Animals, because of poor, sloppy breeding practices producing dogs that had behavioral issues that were passed on in the genes. I still would not own one bred in America. In recent years the normally loving and faithful LAB has moved up the Bites recorded list! According to the site below, it is NOT a total ban. However I have not been able to find a site to research what the law states EXACTLY. Most sites I've checked (news type and so on) indicate that it IS a total ban..IN DUBLIN. Either way, I find it unfortunate to say the least. http://fatmammycat.blogspot.com/2007/07/dog-ban.html Another interesting perspective. http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83372

I totally agree with you all....all these dogs have the potential to be nice...I personally own a red nose pit bull. He is the best dog I have ever known...sweet and loving. I wouldnt trade him for the world.

All of these dogs are very good dogs. It's the owners that make a dog bad or mean, not the dog itself. I've been threatened by many more little yappy dogs than big dogs. Bull terriers and pitbulls are not the same dogs at all. Bullies don't have the aggression of pits. Alsatians have been bred to work with man and are known for their obedience. Most of these dogs seem to be chosen for their size and type of jaw formation and not for the type of temperament the breed is known for. What's next, newfoundlands? I read a bit about this ban and it isn't a total ban against these dogs...yet. It involves people living on Dublin council properties. But they want to extend the ban to include parks and walkways so you wouldn't be able to walk your dog anywhere.

i have 3 staffies and to me they are the best dog ive ever had but all of the dogs above are good dogs if they are in the right hands. its not the dogs who are wrong its the way the owners bring them up.

German shepherds rock

Akita's are great. I've never been around a mean one in my life.

Akita's are great. I've never been around a mean one in my life.

German Shepherds are wonderful dogs I had two and never ever any problems. Doberman Rhodesian Ridgeback Rottweiler. All of these breeds are great dogs unless badly treated or badly trained. The other dogs listed I have little experience of their natures.They are probably good dogs I would never trust an American Pitt Bull

My parents have a Rhodesian Ridgeback - he rocks! He was my replacement when I moved out for college. He's totally fine around people and kids as long as they're not 'intruding' - he hates the mailman and the people who check the gas meters but anyone my parents invite in is fine. He looks vicious in the 1st pic (we were playing) but check out the 2nd.

This isn't about dogs being dangerous. Having read the link helpfully supplied by Redhawk it becomes obvious this is about one thing and one thing only - money. The council simply doesn't want to have to put it's hand in it's pocket if anyone were injured by a dog on it's property. Hence the plan to amend the by-laws to allow the new law to cover all public parks. You will note that all the dogs included in the list are large and muscular. This gives a big clue. The most aggressive dog I've ever met (and the only one that's ever bitten me) was a West Highland terrier, no more than 8 inches off the ground. Yes, it bit me, but could it damage me? Not seriously. A larger breed might be able to do so, therefore occasioning a potentially serious cash payout after a court case, if the council could be proven to have any liability. It obviously fears it would have liability if such an attack took place on it's property. This is where the politics of the madhouse emerge. To avoid POTENTIAL payouts, the council has decided to load the dice and reduce it's risk of financial loss to practically nil. It can obviously find much more important things to spend 'it's' money on. I'm happy to note the existence of much shocked amazement and disgust from many on the same site. Under the European Human Rights Act, a person has an absolute right to enjoy his/her posessions. A dog is, I think, a posession (in law), and therefore, unless it the dog can be proven to pose a risk to the public, to destroy it should be illegal. The only thing that will stop this before it starts is to convince the council that it's financial losses might be greater if they go ahead with their proposals. Unlike unacountable politicians however, the law works quite slowly, and I will be surprised if this tactic can stop the great and the good in Dublin organising the beginning of a canine genocide.

This isn't about dogs being dangerous. Having read the link helpfully supplied by Redhawk it becomes obvious this is about one thing and one thing only - money. The council simply doesn't want to have to put it's hand in it's pocket if anyone were injured by a dog on it's property. Hence the plan to amend the by-laws to allow the new law to cover all public parks. You will note that all the dogs included in the list are large and muscular. This gives a big clue. The most aggressive dog I've ever met (and the only one that's ever bitten me) was a West Highland terrier, no more than 8 inches off the ground. Yes, it bit me, but could it damage me? Not seriously. A larger breed might be able to do so, therefore occasioning a potentially serious cash payout after a court case, if the council could be proven to have any liability. It obviously fears it would have liability if such an attack took place on it's property. This is where the politics of the madhouse emerge. To avoid POTENTIAL payouts, the council has decided to load the dice and reduce it's risk of financial loss to practically nil. It can obviously find much more important things to spend 'it's' money on. I'm happy to note the existence of much shocked amazement and disgust from many on the same site. Under the European Human Rights Act, a person has an absolute right to enjoy his/her posessions. A dog is, I think, a posession (in law), and therefore, unless it the dog can be proven to pose a risk to the public, to destroy it should be illegal. The only thing that will stop this before it starts is to convince the council that it's financial losses might be greater if they go ahead with their proposals. Unlike unacountable politicians however, the law works quite slowly, and I will be surprised if this tactic can stop the great and the good in Dublin organising the beginning of a canine genocide.

This isn't about dogs being dangerous. Having read the link helpfully supplied by Redhawk it becomes obvious this is about one thing and one thing only - money. The council simply doesn't want to have to put it's hand in it's pocket if anyone were injured by a dog on it's property. Hence the plan to amend the by-laws to allow the new law to cover all public parks. You will note that all the dogs included in the list are large and muscular. This gives a big clue. The most aggressive dog I've ever met (and the only one that's ever bitten me) was a West Highland terrier, no more than 8 inches off the ground. Yes, it bit me, but could it damage me? Not seriously. A larger breed might be able to do so, therefore occasioning a potentially serious cash payout after a court case, if the council could be proven to have any liability. It obviously fears it would have liability if such an attack took place on it's property. This is where the politics of the madhouse emerge. To avoid POTENTIAL payouts, the council has decided to load the dice and reduce it's risk of financial loss to practically nil. It can obviously find much more important things to spend 'it's' money on. I'm happy to note the existence of much shocked amazement and disgust from many commentators on the same site. Under the European Human Rights Act, a person has an absolute right to enjoy his/her posessions. A dog is, I think, a posession (in law), and therefore, unless the dog can be proven to pose a risk to the public, to destroy it should be illegal. The only thing that will stop this before it starts is to convince the council that it's financial losses might be greater if they go ahead with their proposals. Unlike idiotic politicians however, the law works quite slowly. I will be surprised if this tactic (assuming it would work legally) can stop the great and the good in Dublin organising the beginning of a canine genocide.

Anyone I know who has been bitten / hassled by a dog - those dogs are all small, terrier types, Westies,rat terriers etc. None of those on the list

I own 3 American Pit Bull Terriers, 2 girls and 1 boy, they are my babies and I have never had any problems... OK well except the male likes to lean up against you and he may knock you over, and he might give you a heart attack if your scared of him when he goes to give you a kiss, but other than that. I think all of the above can be/ and are great family pets. I know with the pit bulls you have to watch the pedigree though and watch for certain bloodlines (some of the older bloodlines have more problems than others) and also make sure that the breeder hasn't bred the dogs to closely for too long (which can cause behavioral issues). I am sure it is the same with some, if not all of the above breeds. What I can't figure out is why breeds like Chihuahuas haven't been baned yet... those are viscous! Just because they can't do any damage? who cares, They're a lot more likely to bite and I could just as easily sue someone, a bite is a bite!

They all are!!! It is how the owner brings the dog up, if an owner treats the dog badly or has no authority the dog will play up, however if it brought up with dicipline and love the dog will return your respect. I hate people who think these dogs are bad. some play up and the owner is the one responsible so in my view if the dog bites due to the fact it does not know any better the owner should be put down!!!! We dont go around banning children and putting them down and in my view they are far worse than dogs!!!!

I think they're all good doggies, I particularly love the Rottweiler and Bull Mastiff a lot.

all dogs are good if u bring them up the right way. i love staffies as i have 3 of them. what annoys me most is if a bull dog staffie etc attacks someone its in the paper straight away. now if a yorkie or jack russell attacks some one its left alone. staffies have a bad name but if you have ever owned owned you will know what they are like they even have the nickname nanny dog because they r so good with children. all dogs want to please their owners and if u train them to fight thats what they will do just to please u. my staffie saved my dads life the other week, waking him up when he collapsed. i wouldnt change my dogs for the world. my dogs are special to me and i can even have them off the lead in public. does that sound like a vicious fog to u

They can all be great pets... however, while they're all USUALLY good, and if they are bad it is USUALLY the fault of the owner, there are definitely some breeds more prone to suddenly becoming aggressive than others. I can assert this with some confidence, having worked in an animal shelter. Pit Bulls and Staffies were bred for violence and in rare cases it's not fully bred out of them. German Shepherds are undeserving of their reputation, I think. They're just such a popular guard dog that many of them have been raised aggressive. the real unfortunate one though is Dobermans. In the case of a show-quality purebred male, they have that dramatic narrow head is not large enough for their brains, and so they are probably the most prone to going insane. so, people who preach "no bad dogs, just bad owners" are naive. there ARE breeds that are more likely to be dangerous, but it is still the fault of HUMANS for overbreeding the dogs for specific purposes. however, I have known and loved dogs from ALL those breeds. 99% of them are fully capeable of being lovely pets.

these dogs are not banned in ireland. they have been banned by the dublin council from council run housing in dublin. not anywhere else in ireland.

Rottweiler, German Shepherd, Doberman, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Bull Terrier (I'm not sure which one). I don't know enough about the others to say.

Hello; I have a very large male Doberman --- he is wonderful with people and children. He never growls or barks unless he or the family is threatened. I have had Great Danes, Labs and a variety of other animals. Once they have adjusted they have all been great pets. I do not play aggressive with any of them and they never snarl. The only incident happened when my young niece kept pulling my 12-year old dogs hair. The dog grabbed her arm with her mouth and let her know she did not like it. It was our fault as we as adults should have corrected the child's behavior and separated them. I wish I could control my temper and be as happy as my dog seems to be everyday. We are never sure of anything! OFM

All of them. It's not the dog, it's the owners/breeders that create problems. I have seen poodles that were viscous and dobermans that were lap dogs. It's all about training and the kind of care they get, not the dog breed.

The American Pitbull Terrier is actually the smartest believe it or not. Being intelligent, athletic dogs, American Pit Bull Terriers excel in many dog sports, including weight pulling, dog agility, flyball, lure coursing and advanced obedience competition. Some pit bulls have been known to do well in schutzhund as well. OUT OF THE 25 DOGS WHO HAVE EARNED U.K.C. "SUPREDOG" STATUS (BY GAINING CHAMPIONSHIP TITLES IN CONFORMATION, OBEDIENCE, AGILITY, AND WEIGHTPULL, FOURTEEN HAVE BEEN AMERICAN PITBULLS Out of the 25 dogs who have earned UKC "superdog" status (by gaining championship titles in conformation, obedience, agility, and weightpull), fourteen have been pit bulls

Their banned in Ireland? Why? They should ban some of the terriorsts in Ireland. If they have dogs no wonder.

I dont think breed has anything to do with animal aggression....Im sure if I had any of these cool dogs they would be an excelent animal with a very nice temperment....its all in the owner. you should have asked, "which type of person would be a good owner for these pets?"

All of the above. I guess it is not a total ban, and property owners, per say (as Dublin does own it's parks, etc...) can regulate what types of pets are allowed on such property. But I have also been attacked by a mutt who nearly took the bottom of my right leg clean off, and a maladjusted cocker spaniel.

German Shepherd, but I am biased!

Staffies rule!!

English Bull Terrier??? They banned Spuds McKenzie???? Thats the most ridiculous thing ever.

Every single one of them.