Guilford Gates

My letter is one with questions.

After the discovery of Dr. Walter Loch and his wife brutally beaten, one of the neighbors said that Guilford should be a "gated community." I believe she said something about her tax payments, but I can't remember her specific words.

I do not live in her city. Do my state taxes help pay for her community roads and police, or do the other city residents help pay for her community roads and police?

Or do the well-to-do Guilford residents pay taxes unto themselves?

Several years ago, there was something in The Sun about Gibson Island being shut off from public access, but its roads were maintained with the public tax money. What ever became of that? Is the situation still the same?

I wonder if perhaps Guilford territory is really not faced with the issue of race (as has been said) so much as the issue of class.

Deborah J. Harrison

Aberdeen

A-Bomb Unneeded

Columnist Theo Lippman Jr. argues (Aug. 15) that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima that killed 100,000 people, mostly civilians, should not be considered an atrocity because the use of atomic bombs brought "victory" and saved the lives of all those who would have been killed in the invasion of Japan that "probably" would have been necessary without the bombings.

So he implies that the politicians are right in denouncing the Smithsonian Institution as "anti-American" for presenting contrary information.

Although Mr. Lippman's statement of the facts are as we were told repeatedly since 1945, they are false.

Admittedly, it is difficult to find the truth because the U.S. government's own inquiry into the effects of the atomic bombings was not widely publicized, but it exists as a public document, "U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey." The survey investigators reported to President Truman:

"Based on a detailed investigation of the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

This conclusion that the nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably was not needed to end World War II before the invasion of Japan scheduled for Nov. 1, 1945,was ignored because it is more comforting to think that our nation's acts of violence are fully justified.

But even if our government's own assessment of the facts had squared with the story handed the press about the atom bombs bringing victory, Mr. Lippman's call for a celebration of the mass violence of the atomic bombing is unfortunate in a society where the impulse to individual violence is unusually strong.

Maybe there is a connection between the rationalization of our society's acts of collective violence and heedless individual behavior.

Carleton W. Sterling

Baltimore

Anyone But

I refer to your Aug. 21 endorsement for governor and your choice of the issues. But there are new issues now: The welfare mess, crime, education, and one underlying cause of all the above that nobody wants to talk about -- individual responsibility.

Socialist intellectuals have been preaching lifestyles management by government for 30 years, and see where we are.

Parris Glendening is preaching more of the same as a true "Clinton Democrat," as Peter Jay says. What we will have is bigger welfare, more crime and bigger government to do all of this.

According to your endorsement, Helen Bentley's strong point is her ability to attract jobs to the state.

What she has attracted is work due us. Remember, government contracts are paid for by Maryland citizens in the first place. What she has attracted is a share of of our own tax dollars.

What does she know about welfare? Or about the education of children? Or about state government organization? Or about crime prevention? Or about state budgets?

The Sun endorsements give one clear messages to this voter: Vote for any one but Mr. Glendening and Mrs. Bentley.

Fred Mott

Towson

Make Crime Pay

Let's see: 100,000 new law enforcers for $30 billion. That's $300,000 per law enforcer. How many criminals will this take off the streets of America, put into overcrowded prisons? Do you really believe it?

I've got a surer, more cost-effective suggestion. Let's pay 100,000 criminals $200,000 apiece to permanently leave the U.S.A. That not only takes criminals off the street, but saves taxpayers $13 billion.

Or is the real agenda just more pork and welfare?

Thomas R. Middaugh

Millersville

A World-Class Children's Museum Downtown

On several occasions, I have visited the Baltimore Children's Museum at the Cloisters and, frankly, I can't wait for the move to downtown Baltimore.

Baltimore deserves a Children's Museum that meets the needs of the majority of its population and is equal in stature to the Maryland Science Center and National Aquarium.

Lynda Case Lambert (Opinion * Commentary, July 15) offers interesting arguments against any effort to relocate the museum. The thrust centers on the following points: (1) the Cloisters' free admission, (2) the Cloisters' pristine country setting and (3) its architectural/structural features.

Ms. Lambert has already addressed the "free admission" issue in her Aug. 2 letter to the editor, admitting essentially that her information regarding free admission was inaccurate.

Certainly, patrons should pay a fee to offset the costs of administering a first-rate museum in the city if such a facility is to rival the excellence of both the Maryland Science Center and the National Aquarium.

Although interesting, Ms. Lambert's points regarding location and aesthetic design of the "castle" are actually the source of some of the museum's greatest shortcomings: the museum's location and its inaccessibility.

Because it is located in the "country," the Cloisters has appealed, not surprisingly, to people who live in suburbia.

For this group, getting to the museum is a simple matter of packing into a car and driving "the short distance" to the museum. Not so for central city residents who rely on public transportation.

Getting from the central city to the suburbs by light rail, bus or subway may be a time-consuming and even daunting experience for parents with young children.

By the time these residents have waited for buses, made several transfers and walked finally up the hill to the "castle," these patrons will, in all likelihood, be too exhausted to appreciate the museum and enjoy any "cool breeze" that might be blowing at that time.

It is a much easier undertaking to get to downtown destinations by light rail, bus or subway when one is in the city; buses normally run on a more frequent schedule within city limits.

As far as the "European-inspired fantasy castle" architectural design goes, let me say that some icons are better left in the past.

A recent lawsuit against the Cloisters regarding its inaccessibility to the disabled shows that the museum does not serve all segments of the population. Inadequacies in the structural design alone, e.g., no elevators or ramps, prevent the disabled from experiencing the "magnificent interiors and furnishings" that Ms. Lambert raves about.

Parents with infants/toddlers can find a visit to the Cloisters a stressful ordeal, too.

For one thing, strollers are not allowed. Any parent with children under three years of age knows that a stroller is an essential piece of equipment for successful family outings.

Furthermore, no indoor dining/lunchroom area exists. The visitor must either eat outdoors or in his or her car. Not good options during inclement weather or for the patron who has arrived on site by way of public transportation.

It is my hope that the new museum will meet the needs of all who visit it.

I envision Baltimore with a world-class Children's Museum that is accessible to the broadest population possible -- accessible to the disabled, accessible to children, accessible to us all.

Rachelle L. Collins

Baltimore