And maybe it's time to think about getting my first firearm.

First off -- abandon any idea of using rock salt -- pissing off an intruder is only going to get you killed.

Since you'd be new to firearm ownership, let me give you my armchair opinion.

Get a pump action 12 gauge shotgun, and a bunch of 00 buckshot. Hornady makes a gimmicky "Zombie Max" 12 gauge shell, and while it's gimmicky, Hornady makes some damn good ammo (I carry the critical defense hollowpoints in my everyday carry gun, a Springfield XDS chambered in .45 ACP). Don't waste time with bird shot, rock salt, or any other "less lethal" method.

As far as brands -- Remington, Mossberg -- won't go wrong with either one of those.

Finally, buy a box of cheap #8 birdshot and head to a range. One common misconception of a shotgun is that you don't have to aim it, it's a "room broom" -- and that notion is complete horseshit. Yes, the shot will expand but that pattern, especially indoors, and with 8 pellets (00 buck) it's not going to expand that much as to preclude you from aiming it.

Now -- some armchair "experts" will tell you never to cock it as a warning. I disagree with this -- one of my best friends is an officer, and she told me that 95% of the time, cocking a shotgun is enough and you don't have to pull the trigger -- and the other 5% of the time, you're going to have to pull the trigger because the assailant is going to kill everyone in the house.

If you'd rather have a handgun -- get a Glock in .45 ACP, with the highest magazine capacity that your moonbat idiot leaders in Kaliforniastan will let you have. I have a Glock 21 in .45 ACP, and let me tell you -- it's a nail driver. Extremely accurate at the range, and I get a 3 inch grouping at 50 yards with it.

But whatever you get -- practice, practice, practice. And have fun. No such thing as a bad day at the range. Keep the gun clean and the ammo dry and it will last you for decades.

Did Hitler mean well?

They meant well, though, right? No matter what bad they do, they meant well, and that makes up for it. You know, like Hitler.

Right. But the point is that they now say it was an oversight, even though the architect said it was intentional, and for a specific and well-defined purpose.

So we know the language of the text is clear: it's for state exchanges. Their argument became, "well that wasn't intentional; if it were, that would be contrary to the purpose of the ACA." We know however, based on this quote and other similar ones, that it was intentional, and perfectly in line with the purpose of the ACA.

Gruber said in another comment in 2012 that the reason why you can't get subsidies for the federal exchange is so that states will be encouraged to make their own exchange.

Screens come in all sizes and aspect ratios

So do developer's brains. Perhaps even more so than the screens. :)