Dear Google

    Dear Google,

I would like to suggest that you reconfigure Blogger so that the template on which I type the blog matches the one you use to print it. There is no reason I should have to check the blog and reformat it if I don't think it looks nice. The "compose" function should be made to match the "print" function, with the same number of characters per line.
thanks

the next amendment, maybe

     If the people--the voters-- of the United States want to take guns out of private hands, they would need a constitutional amendment.  Gun advocates argue that the intent of the framers ( of our Constitution ) was that every citizen should be allowed to own a gun. I find the "intent of the framers " argument to be worse than spurious. The men who "framed" our Constitution were some of the plainest writers and clearest thinkers who have ever lived. Their intent is evident in their written words. They left us a written law, and the capacity to change that law when we disagree with it. What's there in plain words is " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". We can't merely wish these words into something else--a dangerous precedent. We have written laws so that we are not subject to the whim of a king or potentate. We may never get all the way to "equality under the law", but without written laws, we would still be medieval.
    As for the "intent of the framers", what the people of the United States did, in 1775,  was to form militias that were illegal, according to the British government. The American Revolution began when these militias fought to defend their store of arms--guns and ammunition-- from confiscation by the British. We are taught to admire this, as part of the history of the freedom enjoyed by American citizens. But using it to advocate gun ownership would mean that paramilitary groups and neo-Nazi militias have the same rights those embattled farmers insisted on at Lexington and Concord.
    

jury selection

     The system of jury selection is theoretically a way to choose 12 people at random to render a verdict in a trial. In reality, the system is far from random. No one can sit on a jury if he or she has been a victim of a crime in the past several years. No one can sit on a jury if a close relative or friend had been a victim of  a crime. No one can sit on a jury in a capital case unless he or she has already decided--before anyone utters a word of legal argument, or produces any evidence--that the death penalty would be a good idea.  Other people are "usually" dismissed from juries--teachers, lawyers, law enforcement officials, and some other occupations or professions.
     Every one of these exceptions make the jury less representative of the public at large, which it should be, since that's what gives it legitimacy. It's why we respect a jury's decisions. Decisions made by juries fine-tuned by lawyers are decisions made by lawyers--not by a group of 12 citizens.
    

greetings from your Uncle Sam

     Too many young people don't really know what they need to do in order to register to vote. They often try to register when it is too late. Since Uncle Sam now knows when everyone turns 18, perhaps he could send each of our young people a birthday greeting, including instructions on how to register to vote.If this needs to be handled by the states, Uncle Sam could share just that much Social Security information.

a new national anthem

     The notion that we need a new national anthem has been popular off and on over the last thirty years or so. Some people claim that our national anthem is too old-fashioned, or that it is difficult to sing, although the crowds at ball games seem to do a good job with it. Others claim that it is a song about war, although they also claim that it is gory or violent, which it isn't. It is just the story of someone trying to see if the flag was still flying over an American fort ( military base ) that was being bombed.  Still others claim that our national anthem was set to the tune of a drinking song. This is usually used as ploy to be excused from singing the national anthem in school.  The tune used for the national anthem had most likely been several songs over the years, as most tunes were, " back in the day". It was published ( written down ) with the lyrics to a drinking song, one that was still remembered by people who had read the lyrics. So it could be reproduced by people who had never heard it, but who could read the poem in a newspaper.
     The two songs that have been suggested as replacements for the national anthem--"God Bless America", and "America the Beautiful"--are both religious songs, inappropriate for a country that guarantees the separation of church and state. The other song suggested as a replacement--"America" ( My Country 'Tis of Thee )--shares a tune with Britain's national anthem, "God Save the Queen" ( or king, when the sovereign is a king ), so it would be an odd choice for a new American national anthem.