Stephenson county jail george buss Continue As a player, former rabbiter Jim Bouton did nothing halfway; he threw so hard that he lost his cap on almost every pitch. In the early 70s, he threw one of the funnest, most revelations, insider's on baseball life in Ball Four, his diary of the season he tried to hit his way back from forgotting on the power of a knuckler. The true curve, however, is Bouton's honesty. He carved people out of heroes, shining a light in the game's corners. A quarter century later, Bouton's unique baseball vote can still bring the heat. * A book deep in the American tsref, so deep in fact it is by no means a sportsbook - David HalberstamBall Four is a human book, not just a baseball book. - Christopher Lehmann-Haupt, The New York Times a book deep in the American triek, so deep in fact it's by no means a sports book -David HalberstamBall Four is a people book, not just a baseball book. - Christopher Lehmann-Haupt, The New York TimesWhen Ball Four was first published in 1970, it hit the sporting world like a lightning bolt. Commissioners, managers, players and sports writers were thrown into a statement of shock. Amazed. Scandalised. The controversy was front page news. Sportswriters called Bouton a Jude, a Benedict Arnold and a social leper. Commissioner Bowie Kuhn tried to force the author to sign a statement saying the book was not true. One team actually burned a copy of Ball Four in protest. And Bouton was still not invited to Oldtimers' Day at Yankee Stadium. Fans, but loved ones Ball Four and serious critics called it an important document. It was also very popular among people who didn't usually follow baseball, because Ball Four is not strictly a book about baseball, but one about people who are baseball players. And it's hilariously funny. For the twentiesth anniversary edition of this historic book, Bouton wrote a new epilogue, which his career as an inventor, his battle with the Wrigley Company over bubble adhesive, she takes on the Pete Rose controversy, and how baseball looks two decades after he changed his public image forever. Jim Bouton, former major league batsman, is now a writer, businessman, motivational speaker and ace pitcher for a semipro baseball team near his home in Teaneck, New Jersey. The Ghosts of Belfast review, Part IIIPart I ... Part II IV ... The Problems, Continued (see spoils)[Casualties, continued (see spoiler)[Violence level: comparisons with the USA (see spoils)[After doing a lot of calculations and equations, I decided to sum up just my conclusions here. If someone wants to see the data t The Ghost of Belfast review, I Part IIIPart I ... Part II The Problems, Continued (see spoils)[Casualties, continued (see spoiler)[Violence level: comparisons with the USA (see spoils)[After doing a lot of calculations and equations, I decided to sum up just my conclusions here. If someone wants to see the data, the next spoiler section is true to watch. Basically, my conclusion is that the problems were an unfortunate time in Northern Ireland not so much because of the absolute levels of violence, but rather (at least for the people who live there) due to violence levels relative to the time before the problems, and due to other aspects of the violence discussed in the following section. That should be the case (suppose I am correct) maybe shouldn't be surprising. Nevertheless, for me it was surprising. Basically, the levels of violence (numerical as murder rates) in Northern Ireland during the years of the problems were either clear below, or slightly above the rates in the US as a whole. If we try to compare only numbers for Belfast, to American cities, no matter what assumptions are used to produce the Belfast numbers, the rates are roughly comparable to what has been seen in many American cities for years, and are actually much less than some rates in some cities. These facts are my reason to say that the absolute levels of violence during the problems were not an adequate cause for the reputation that Northern Ireland had during the Problems.Numbers and more numbers (see spoiled)[I estimate that the population of Northern Ireland averaged about 1.58 million people during The Problems, based on data downloaded from ... Based on the US 10 year census figures, I estimate the American population during this 33 years averaged 239 million. Scaling of the 107 deaths per year by the factor (239/1.58) gives 16,185 per year, or 534 thousand for 33 years in a country with the population of the US more than half a million deaths. It sounds horrific. But then I wondered what half a million deaths over a 30+ year period would mean in the US. So I tried to put this half-million casualties comparison in context. The first thing I could determine was that the US had about 1.5 million traffic deaths over the same period. Okay, these are accidents, not purposeful acts of violence. A more useful comparison would simply be murder total. For an American figure, I found ( on the 84 ) a table containing the number of murders per year in the US, and found that over the years 1969-2001, there were 19,900 murders per year (average) in the U.S.To getting a figure for Northern Ireland, I started with the number of 3529 (the trouble-related deaths were all murders for this purpose), but then what about the background killings that were supposedly committed but were not included in the of time? I found that there were no easily available figures. Some of the reasons for this are listed in ... , on the CAIN website. This article also mentions that Northern Ireland actually has a very low overall crime rate, but that although the overall crime rates are low, it has a high rate of serious crime, such as murder and robbery. These crimes are almost exclusively associated with terrorism and the problems. This statement appears to indicate that the number 3529 could only be used as the murder total for Northern Ireland; although one wonders about the phrase almost exclusively. I decided to use two totals for Northern Ireland; the above total, and a second one that would be the sum of that number and a background murder rate that I would estimate as good as possible. Unfortunately, the best I was able to do was to make a vague and memorable statement in ... that Northern Ireland nowadays averages 3-4 murders per month. It would be about 42 a year these days. But nowadays Northern Ireland has a population of about 1.8 million (2010), so the 42 per year is equivalent to 37 per year in the lower population of the Problems. Total one for Northern Ireland murders (during the Troubles) will be 107 per year, and the total two will be (very te te tetapent) 144 per year. Murder rates for years 1969-2001, per 100,000 population U.S. 19,900/2390 = 8.3Northern Ireland 1 107/15.8 = 6.8Northern Ireland 2 144/15.8 = 9.1Recent Murder rates, per 100,000 population Northern Ireland nowadays 42/18 = 2.3U.S., 2000-2011 5.5 (The latter estimate based on a median value of 16189 American killings in those years, and an average population of ~295 million.) Eventually, I'll just throw out a few murder rates for cities. These numbers are all for different periods (this is the data I was able to find), but the numbers for American cities are simply numbers available on the web. I had to make assumptions for the Belfast figure, which is given below if someone cares. Louisville is mentioned above as comparable in size with Metropolitan Belfast. Philadelphia and Houston bracket (in the population) the population of Northern Ireland.Homicide rates for urban areas, per 100,000 populationBelfast A 1969-2001 7.8Belfast B same 10.1Belt C the same 10.5BeltFast D same 12.9Houston TX 1999-2011 13.3Louisville KY 1999-2002 13.7Philadelphia 1990-2010 25.0Belfast estimates (see spoiled)[The main information I use in making these estimates are from Belf demographics, where it is declared that, After experiencing huge growth in the first half of the twentiesth century, This rise slowed and peaked around the beginning of the problems with the 1971 census that found nearly 600,000 people in the Belfast Urban Area. the inner city numbers of city numbers if people moved to the Greater Belfast suburb population swelling. The 2001 census population in the same Urban Area fell to 277,391 people, with 579,554 people living in the wider Belfast Metropolitan Area. From this statement it is possible to make a rough estimate (based on the average population at the approached beginning and end of the period) of the populations of the Belfast Urban area (inner city) and the Belfast Metropolitan area (greater Belfast) for the years of problems. For the urban area we are on average 600,000 and 277,000, acquisition of 438,500; and for the Metropolitan area we are on average 600,000 and 580,000, to 590,000.The reason why it is important is simply that the figures I cited in the Belfast section for Belfast casualties are based on a sum of casualties for North, South, East and West Belfast; but I don't know what these casualties contained areas. Were they used as made up of pieces of the 44 square miles of inner city? Or were they used as areas approached closer to the 370 square miles of Metropolitan area? Without knowing this, I can't allocate a population estimate to the sums of these areas.