Is it too late for a little sanity?

Ever since the news hit last Saturday of the mass shooting in Arizona, the subject has been discussed over and over again. But I can't let this pass without a word on one aspect of this tragedy that I don't think has received enough mention.
Gabrielle Giffords, who was the apparent target in this assassination attempt, is a bright, young Congresswoman whose personality apparently brings smiles to the faces of even those who are her most staunch political opponents in Congress. She won another term in Congress in a tough race in a district that the opposition had poured a lot of resources in attempting to take her seat away.
Since this assassination attempt involved a federal elected official, it didn't take long for politics to raise its ugly head as factions from all sides pointed the finger of blame at one another. Sarah Palin, Alaska's most well-known fishing expert, apparently published a map before the election with cross-hairs drawn on districts her group wanted to target for election. Some of her nut case opponents tried to intimate that she was calling for physical harm to come to candidates of the opposition in these districts. Somebody in her camp tried to explain this away by stating that these weren't cross-hairs, but surveyors symbols. That might have been the only statement in this whole event that was funny.
Regardless of what I think of Sarah Palin as a political figure, when I saw that map, I thought immediately that the symbols were what you would see in the sites if you were aiming a gun. But I also don't think she was in any way suggesting that the candidates should be killed. She bills herself as an outdoors woman, one who has probably fired a gun or two in her day and cross-hairs were a logical way of telling her unfortunate followers that these districts should be targeted for change, not physically eliminating the opposition.
In years past, I have commented on the need for real gun control in this country. At one point, I suggested that if people wanted to have guns, we should allow them, but eliminate ammunition for all but police officers and soldiers. Then I suggested that hunters could have ammunition, but only a limited amount and be required to buy it like they would prescription drugs.
I've mellowed a bit over the years. Maybe it's being acquainted with law enforcement people and hunters. Maybe it's having deer cross in front of me on the highway several times and wishing that deer hunters would be more successful to keep these critters off the hood of my car. So as my respect for hunters has increased, I have come to realize the good of such organizations as Ducks Unlimited and Pheasants Forever and yes, even some activities of the National Rifle Association.
That said, I still can't understand why some guy was apparently able to walk into a gun shop in Arizona a few weeks ago and walk out with a Glock semi-automatic handgun with a clip that would hold 31 bullets. If I understand how this weapon works, if you load this clip, you can fire it as fast as you can squeeze the trigger.
I have a simple question: Why are these types of weapons available? What hunter needs this? If you feel the need for a weapon for personal protection and you need a gun that fires 31 shots in under 30 seconds, somebody in that army you will be facing will get you before you can empty your weapon.
If you suggest that these weapons should be banned, some folks in the NRA will cry that if you take away our automatic weapons, next you will want to take our shotguns. Excuse me, but this is a bunch of bull! They would have you believe that this was apparently an act of a mentally deranged individual who would have accomplished his task even if he didn't have a weapon of this type. But if he had been armed with something with a lot fewer bullets, especially with the heroes that helped subdue him, there's no way he could have hit 20 people.
The shooting of even one person is terrible. The killing of six and the wounding of 14 others in less than 30 seconds should make all of us call for some sanity in gun possession. If somebody knows why we need the kind of weapon used in this incident, please let me know. In the meantime, let's not be quick to point fingers of blame to one political faction or another and spend our energy bringing some sanity to gun possession in this country.