The people that you "cannot convince" are likely the same people who, in fact, haven't the proverbial clue about what an "assault weapon" in the ASSAULT RIFLE sense of the term actually is. I doubt that the facts of the matter, which they likely have never had any real contact wth, would make any real difference to such types.
By the way, the term "assault weapon" is meaningless, while the term Assault Rifle is a TECHNICAL TERM that has a quite specific definition, and meaning as with the following. Assault Rifle: Selective fire weapon, chambered for an intermediate power cartridge. A U.S. Military issue example of the above would have been the M-2 Carbine, of Korean War fame, a selective fire weapon, of rifle configuration, chambered for an intermediate power cartridge.
This goes back to when the 30-06 was the Service Rifle Cartridge, and the Service Pistol fired the 45 ACP. The M-1/M-2 Carbine round fell between the above mentioned re power and size, being that intermediate power cartridge.
Getting back to the people you cannot convince, one can lead a horse to water, but one cannot make the creature drink.
In conclusion, you mentioned "need" in your post. I submit that "need" doesn't even begin to enter into things. For example, regarding the thousands of SUV's bring driven on the public roads, how many of the people who own these vehicles "need" them, as opposed to the number of people who, for one reason or another, simply "want" them?