Tbf I’d argue that we’re atill arguing definitions because the anti crowd refuses to learn them, instead opting for “nuh uh.” If, instead, the antis would use the new information to say something like “ok fine, assault weapons is the wrong term, let’s use their term and say that has to be banned,” the conversation would progress. Of course, the pro side would still disagree, but at least then the argument wouldn’t be like

“so the definition of assault rifle requires it to be select fire, that was banned in 1986”

“nuh uh, it is an assault rifle cause I said so. Weapon of war.”

Instead it’d be something like

“All rifles are only responsible for 500/60,000 gun deaths for a rate of .2%, banning ARs solves nothing.”

“Yeah but they are cosmetically similar to the rifles the Military uses and I don’t like that.”