If the underlying point is correct then yes, of course, or at the very least not act like the point is invalid based on a disagreement you have with the terminology used, especially when it's as pedantic as yours is. You can argue all you want about there being no such thing as a hunting rifle, nobody will take you seriously when a quick google image search gives you an unqualified answer as to what a hunting rifle might mean to a layperson.

And what might kill one deer easily doesn't necessarily have to be able to kill 20 school children in a short space of time. You have admitted your background with fire arms, if you had to pick a weapon up off a rack holding an AR-15, a semi-automatic handgun of your choice or a Remington Model 700 to kill 20 children as quickly as possible at short range what would you opt for? Actually, as a grounded and informed individual it probably doesn't matter what you think as we have a nice bank of evidence that shows the nutters have made that decision already.