I think you are loosing this batttle. To me, a gun either shoots one bullet at a time, or it shoots a lot of them. The second one
is autmatic or an assault one as far as I am concerned. The difference is that the first one will kill less people in a given amount
of time. We don't quite have your knowledge on this subject.
Interestingly enough, in a perverse kind of way one could claim that I'm winning and should just hush. If all the folks arguing that we need to "ban automatic weapons" were to actually succeed in getting their language adopted in a law, the current assault on the 2nd Amendment would come to a pathetic end; since automatic weapons are already extremely hard to get with a total ban wouldn't do much of anything and the semi-automatic weapons would be totally untouched! Sadly, somebody would probably correct the language in the proposed legislation.
You are quite right in that there is a vast disparity of knowledge about weapons and their real use. For this reason I haven't spent a whole lot of time trying to point out that the notion that there is going to be a vast difference between the number of people killed in these kinds of attacks buy limiting magazine capacity, or banning certain types of guns is fantasy. Magazine capacity and cyclic or sustained firing rates matter a lot more when there are two sides shooting at each other than when there is one guy shooting fish in a barrel.