Can you please comment on what I did well and what I could have done differently in the following response I wrote? Here is the question I had to respond to:What is the 6th Amendment right to a jury? What is the jury provision of the 6th Amendment meant to protect? Why might the founding fathers include such a provision in the Bill of Rights? Does the jury system suffer from any flaws? Is the jury system still an effective mechanism of the judicial system? Explain.And here is my response:The 6th Amendment offers a special kind of protection by ensuring that people have the right to a fair trial with a jury of their peers. This means that when someone is on trial, they're judged by ordinary people from their community, not just by the government. It's a beautiful idea that came from our founding fathers' desire to keep the balance and prevent any misuse of power, reflecting their experiences and the values they cherished. However, like most things, the jury system isn't perfect. Sometimes, juries can be influenced by personal biases or they might not fully grasp the laws they need to apply, which can lead to decisions that aren't quite fair or consistent. Plus, the process of selecting who gets to be on a jury can sometimes be swayed too much by lawyers. But even with these imperfections, the jury system still plays a crucial role in our judicial system. It allows everyday citizens to engage directly with the laws of our land, lending a hand in making justice more accessible and grounded. It acts as a safeguard against too much government control and represents a wide range of societal values. To keep this system working well, we need to continuously educate and reform, making sure juries are as fair and knowledgeable as possible. It's about nurturing this system with care and commitment, ensuring it remains a core part of how justice is served.