No, it has no guilt or innocence. However, that doesn't change its nature. You can't with a straight face say that the AR wasn't designed without fighting in mind. Conceding that point isn't the same as conceding defeat.
Also, when you say things like "well my semi auto ranch rifle isn't an assault weapon but put a pistol grip on it and it becomes one, therefore the law is pointless", you are pointing out how the current law has no teeth. Meaning what you're effectively doing is giving constructive criticism to the anti's on how to make the law more effective.
And harping on the "clips vs magazines" thing doesn't help anyone. The two words may have once been different, but nowadays it's a difference without a distinction. The anti's know what a magazine is, even if they call it a clip.
And stop using arguments like "Connecticut has strict gun laws, Sandy Hook still happened, therefore gun laws don't work". It's common knowledge how easy it is to get guns across a state border. Anyone could do it. When you say this, you're actually arguing FOR the need for federal laws to prevent such actions.
And for God's sake, stop saying that the gun bans of Chicago are the reason for the high crime rate. Correlation does not imply causation.
I am as pro gun as anyone here, but when I hear arguments like this I cringe. These arguments are easily picked apart by anyone with a basic understanding of logic.