Weigh in on Carolyn McCarthy's Departure

The longtime House member has announced her retirement. What will her legacy be?

Carolyn McCarthy  File Photo
Carolyn McCarthy File Photo
A noteworthy Congressional career ended Wednesday with Carolyn McCarthy's announcement that she will not run for re-election.

The 70-year-old Mineola Democrat, whose district includes parts of Wantagh, has been undergoing treatment for lung cancer.

She's often associated with causes relate to gun control and came to prominence when she began speaking out on the issue after her husband Dennis  was killed in the 1993 mass shooting at the Merrilon Avenue Long Island Rail Road Station.

Rep Peter King, R-Seaford, whose district neighbor's McCarthy,  praised her for standing up for Long Islanders.

We want to know what you think. How will you remember McCarthy. What is her legacy? Which of her positions did you agree with and which ones did you differ with? Will her departure strengthen or weaken Long Island's influence in Washington?

Let us know in the Comment section below.
Follow the Money January 09, 2014 at 07:46 AM
It is about time she left. Has accomplished nothing but serving herself. One less liberal is a good thing.
Michael G. January 09, 2014 at 08:07 AM
She tried to speak up for us, save lives through gun control, and was a force for good and reason in Congress. We need more like her, and we are short of reasonable people in both government and here in our community.
Alex Lycoyannis January 09, 2014 at 08:55 AM
"Reasonable people like her?" I don't think someone who crusades against bedrock constitutional rights is reasonable. I feel very sorry for her for what she went through in 1993 and her current health problems, but it is time for her to go. We need way fewer Obama rubber stamps in Congress. Hopefully Frank Scaturro can defeat whatever Obama sycophant the Nassau Democrats put up against him and we can have a Republican other than Peter King representing Long Island in Congress.
EJ48 January 09, 2014 at 09:57 AM
Alex - I think that both I and the public at large have a right to assurance that persons with mental issues or former felons not be allowed to obtain guns and that no one be allowed to own an assault rifle or a magazine holding more than a few rounds of ammunition. Unfortunately IMHO McCarthy was not particularly effective, in part thanks to the NRA, gun manufacturers and some of the real wingnuts in Congress to whom they contribute campaign $.
Chris January 10, 2014 at 08:26 AM
Chris January 10, 2014 at 08:35 AM
The NRA, gun manufacturers, and "wingnuts" have nothing to do with the Congress woman's shortcomings. Her argument to disarm law abiding citizens was as illogical then as it is today. I do believe that felons and people with mental disorders should not be allowed a gun permit. The fact remains that our elected officials swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, not change it. Logic dictates that if her husband or son were armed that night on the LIRR, they would have been able to protect themselves. A call to 911 in that tragic situation was fruitless. I wish the Congress woman well.
EJ48 January 10, 2014 at 11:09 AM
Chris So much to take issue with here. Your statement regarding the possible actions which could have been taken by the Congresswoman’s husband or son on the night they were shot implies that we would all be safer if each of us were walking around carrying a concealed weapon. Frankly, I find that to be preposterous. Congress cannot pass a ban on assault weapons, expanded background checks and/or waiting periods due to political pressure in the form of campaign contributions from the NRA, which receives a significant portion of its funds from gun manufacturers. To suggest that the people in Congress who vote against these sensible measures are somehow doing their duty to uphold the Constitution smacks of naivety. My solution: ban assault weapons, require all guns to be licensed, confiscate any unlicensed gun found and fine its owner, and in addition to the prison sentence given to anyone using a gun to perpetrate a crime, cut off their trigger finger.
Alex Lycoyannis January 10, 2014 at 11:45 AM
EJ48, why exactly is it "preposterous"? It is common sense and borne out by reality. Do mass shooters go where their victims are sitting ducks, or where the populace is more likely to be armed? Liberal "received wisdom" like that which you are exhibiting always flouted common sense, and people who actually look at and are affected by the matter are starting to rethink their positions. Witness the police commissioner of Detroit last week: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140103/METRO01/301030038 " “Coming from California (Craig was on the Los Angeles police force for 28 years), where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of CCWs (carrying concealed weapon permits), and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation. “I changed my orientation real quick. Maine is one of the safest places in America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.” EJ48, your position is quite simply antiquated and not borne out by the facts or human nature.
EJ48 January 10, 2014 at 01:07 PM
IMHO it's ludicrous, insane, silly and sick to think we'd all be safer walking around with concealed weapons. You can find a quote or isolated situation to "prove" anything, but common sense dictates otherwise.
Alex Lycoyannis January 10, 2014 at 02:33 PM
You can go along thinking whatever you'd like if it makes you feel better. Reality, human nature and what our Constitution recognizes is a fundamental human right, however, dictate a contrary conclusion,
John January 10, 2014 at 02:47 PM
EJ...... It is not "preposterous" to be able to defend yourself. Think what it would have been like to be trapped on a moving train knowing that you are next and not having any way out or any way of fighting back. Sheep being led to slaughter. A call to 911 useless. Alex is correct in pointing out the court decision. Please read it. Heroin and cocaine are "banned" in this Country. They are illegal to buy or possess. Yet, any high school student can obtain it on the black market. These drugs are widely available, even though they are banned. We live in an open society. Our borders are open to anyone. If guns are banned they will still be available to anyone who wants one. The law abiding citizen will then be at a greater disadvantage. I will protect myself and my family as our natural born rights allow.
EJ48 January 10, 2014 at 05:45 PM
If y'all think we'd be a better society if we all carried concealed heat, God Bless. The end


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something