"assault weapons" should NOT be banned

PREMISE IPro seems to have dropped Premise I.Then it has been established:If something is unnecessary and poses a significant potential for harm, it should be banned. PREMISE IISemantics"The newest proposed gun control laws consisted of banning SEMI AUTOMATIC rifles with "assault weapon" features. This debate is solely on semi automatic with "assault weapon" FEATURES."Pro is attempting to change the resolution mid-debate.According to the DDO rules, if a word isn't specifically defined in the beginning, we must go by the standard dictionary definition, and the one for "assault weapon" is ANY automatic or semi-automatic fire arm. Pro cannot simply introduce a new definition mid-debate. "... 2. a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.We are using definition #2 for assault weapon. Definition 2 is currently being debated, not definition #1"This was not established prior to my acceptance of the debate. I have already introduced a very reliable dictionary definition before Pro, and centered my arguments around it. He cannot change it like this mid-debate. So, we stick with the original definition:ANY automatic or semi-automatic firearm.Sub-Premise 1: Assault Weapons are UnnecessaryPro appears to have dropped this point.Sub-Premise 2: Assault Weapons are DangerousPro has provided a source that supposedly backs up his claims (http://www.motherjones.com...). Yet within this source, the following quote is found:"[The] Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 isn't just about mass shootings, of course. By far the most common weapons used in these cases are semi-automatic handguns, the type of weapon also at the heart of the daily gun violence plaguing American communities."Going back to the dictionary definition provided, an assault weapon is ANY automatic or semi-automatic weapon, and by Pro's own source, assault weapons are responsible for most mass shootings as well quite a bit of daily gun violence. In fact, aside from the quote; the very TITLE of the article Pro has cited is "More Than Half of Mass Shooters Used Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines" ! More than half is a very substantial percentage, supporting the contention that assault weapons are very, very dangerous."I subjected about ten deaths which leaves the number of people killed in mass shootings by "assault weapons" in the past TEN years to be less than 70 people."This is obviously false, as it is based off Pro's definition of an assault weapon and is not sourced, and thus shall be dismissed."Less than 2% of gun homicides are committed by "assault weapons"For this, Pro cites a table from the FBI, but taking a look at the table, NO WHERE does it specify whether the weapons listed are assault weapons or not; it just lists "hand guns", "rifles", "shot guns", and "other fire arms". Rifles and hand guns CAN be considered assault weapons if they are automatic or semi-automatic, which many are. I have no idea how Pro got that statistic from the table in question..."If you want to test my data with mass shooting statistics, I would implore you to that way you can see my arguments and statistics are not faulty."I have checked out all his sources and none of them support his case at all; in fact, some of them support MY case!My premise remains standing; assault weapons ARE dangerous, as well as unnecessary.And since Pro seems to have dropped by first premise, my conclusion remains valid: assault weapons should be banned. Back to you, Pro.