Why an "assault rifle"?

Thanks to a deranged individual who murdered a number of children and a few adults, the topic of gun control has reached a new level of fervor here in the United States.  Every side is chiming in with the statistics they have to support their belief and to coerce others to capitulate; the debate among people, be it online or at the grocery store check lane has no relevance on what the outcome will be.  There are special interests and politicians who have been around for years that have long awaited their moment to not "...let a good crisis go to waste".  These people will, for a variety of reasons (some personal, some financial, others for more nefarious reasons) try to disarm Americans.  The means they use may vary, perhaps an outright ban on all future sales and transfers of such weapons.  Maybe a ban in conjunction with a declaration of all magazines in excess of 5 or 10 rounds to be illegal...and a cost-prohibitive tax on all ammunition related to such weapons.  It is unlikely that UN troops will be marching door-to-door to collect our "assault rifles" anytime soon, but to be honest, I would prefer this to the latter option as direct confrontation allows me the opportunity to challenge my opposition in a manner that will be unmistakeably heard.

Aside from the most grabby of the gun-grabbers, most people tend to agree that a revolver or shotgun is "authorized" or "permitted" by the Second Amendment.  A somewhat smaller group of people would also include bolt-action/lever-action rifles as "allowable".  A larger divide can be found with regards to semi-auto handguns, where any debate tends to focus on magazine capacity.  Lastly, perhaps the largest divide of all comes with the topic of those evil black rifles; you know, the scary looking ones that cops and soldiers use or the other scary looking ones used by terrorists, Commies, and bad guys in movies.  "Assault rifles".  Why would any ordinary citizen "need" one of those?  They have "high capacity" magazines (actually, 30 is standard capacity), they can be reloaded quickly, and according to Bill O'Reilly they are "heavy weapons".  The Second Amendment was written so we could have muskets right?...or maybe it meant that only the National Guard (government controlled military force) could be armed?  Well, let's look at what the last straw was that caused the Revolution to go hot:  Battles of Lexington and Concord.  It can be stated fairly that both the British soldiers and the colonists had very similar weapons and that the British sought to disarm the militias.  Why was it that our founding fathers said "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."?  Let's break this down a bit.  What does well regulated militia mean?  A website has compiled information relative to the term, please check it out.  http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html  A militia must train regularly, it must utilize and train in tactics of the modern military, and as such, must be equipped with a rifle on par with what is currently used by armies worldwide.