Editor: I am outraged about the Milwaukee police department's handling of the Jeffrey Dahmer case. This man has admitted killing at least 17 men. One of these, a 14-year-old boy, could have been saved by three Milwaukee police officers.
These officers are being given a free vacation with pay for their criminal negligence and ignorance. Suspension with pay is hardly a fair course in exchange for a teenager's life.
The officers should be criminally prosecuted along with Jeffrey Dahmer; they are just as responsible. They handed the boy back to Dahmer because the boy was intoxicated and ''did not respond.'' Dahmer, on the other hand, was ''calm, relaxed and showed no sign of trying to hide anything.''
Wake up, guys, murderers are usually calm and relaxed because they don't feel any emotion. Their emotions are just as dead as the people they kill.
Dawn M. Lyons.
Editor: I read with great interest the article about Hilda Snoops' recent transportation from Annapolis to Baltimore in an Annapolis city fire department ambulance because her doctor does not have admitting privileges in Annapolis hospitals.
A week ago, in my capacity as a registered nurse with a home-care agency, I had to call paramedics for a patient who required emergency care. The patient's doctor and records were in one hospital, less than two miles away. Because of where he lived, the patient had to be transported ''to the nearest hospital,'' where he was not known.
Although this policy is often frustrating for patients and health-care providers, I understand the rationale for it.
What I don't understand is why Mrs. Snoops was transported 30 miles one way in a municipal ambulance. Why didn't she do what the general community is told when they want to go to a specific hospital: Call a private ambulance and pay for it yourself?
Editor: The Sun's Aug. 9 editorial on the suspension of federal funds to the Maryland Arts Council by the National Endowment for the Arts compounds your first errors.
For more than 10 years, the Maryland State Arts Council has been confirming in writing that it was already in compliance with federal laws that guarantee disabled individuals access to its facilities and meetings. As it turns out, this was not, nor is it today, the case.
In November 1990, the NEA received a complaint from a disabled individual who was unable to obtain access to MSAC facilities. After many letters, meetings and consultations failed to move MSAC off the dime, MSAC finally was notified on June 28 that NEA funding would be suspended unless access was provided for the handicapped in 30 days. That suspension was lifted Aug. 15.
Contrary to MSAC's assertions, it was provided with a detailed list identifying the deficiencies in its facilities and recommending improvements. On the eve of the deadline, MSAC submitted plans for structural changes to its Baltimore facilities. This plan did not include any interim arrangements for making its facilities, meetings and archives available to the handicapped.
Our own regulations require that we resolve equal access complaints within six months of their being filed. MSAC had been given eight months, yet was still not in compliance. Under these circumstances, we were required by law to suspend funding.
Understand that the Maryland State Arts Council now is moving quickly toward making its facilities accessible, and in the interim, finding alternate space that is accessible. We applaud that action.
What I cannot understand is why The Sun continues to minimize the basic civil rights guaranteed by law to handicapped persons. If a state agency were denying access to its facilities to any other minority group -- be it on the basis of race or religion, for example -- would The Sun stand for it for even one day?
We did not relish the decision to suspend the funding of one of our grantees. Once MSAC made concrete plans to open its doors to every member of the community the suspension was lifted.
I don't call this ''costly and time-consuming bickering.'' I call it obeying the law.
The writer is general counsel to the National Endowment for the Arts.
Editor: Your July 30 editorial insinuating that Timothy D. Murphy, who has been the top vote-gatherer in Baltimore's 6th District councilmanic race for the last two elections, received some of those votes because the black population thought he came from the Murphy family in Cherry Hill was asinine.
Councilman Murphy has proven to his constituency over the last 10 years that he works for all the people all of the time. People of the 6th District have voted for him because of that fact, not because of his race.