
Gun control crusader and former US Rep. Carolyn McCarthy dead at 81
Former U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, who successfully ran for Congress in 1996 as a crusader for gun control after a mass shooting on a New York commuter train left her husband dead and her son severely wounded, has died. She was 81.
News of her death was shared Thursday by several elected officials on her native Long Island and by Jay Jacobs, chair of the New York State Democratic Committee. Details about her death were not immediately available.
McCarthy went from political novice to one of the nation's leading advocates for gun control legislation in the aftermath of the 1993 Long Island Rail Road massacre. However, the suburban New York Democrat found limited success against the National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment advocates.
McCarthy announced in June 2013 that she was undergoing treatment for lung cancer. She announced her retirement in January 2014.
'Mom dedicated her life to transforming personal tragedy into a powerful mission of public service,' her son, Kevin McCarthy, who survived the shooting, told Newsday. 'As a tireless advocate, devoted mother, proud grandmother and courageous leader, she changed countless lives for the better. Her legacy of compassion, strength and purpose will never be forgotten.'
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul directed flags on all state government buildings to be flown at half-staff Friday in honor of the congresswoman.
'Representative Carolyn McCarthy was a strong advocate for gun control and an even more fierce leader,' Hochul said.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Tom Suozzi said the nation has 'lost a fierce champion.'
'Carolyn channeled her grief and loss into advocacy for change, becoming one of the most dedicated gun violence prevention advocates,' Suozzi said on X.
She became a go-to guest on national TV news shows after each ensuing gun massacre, whether it was at Columbine High School or Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Known as the 'gun lady' on Capitol Hill, McCarthy said she couldn't stop crying after learning that her former colleague, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, had been seriously wounded in a January 2011 shooting in Arizona.
'It's like a cancer in our society,' she said of gun violence. 'And if we keep doing nothing to stop it, it's only going to spread.'
During one particularly rancorous debate over gun show loopholes in 1999, McCarthy was brought to tears at 1 a.m. on the House floor.
'I am Irish and I am not supposed to cry in front of anyone. But I made a promise a long time ago. I made a promise to my son and to my husband. If there was anything that I could do to prevent one family from going through what I have gone through then I have done my job,' she said.
'Let me go home. Let me go home,' she pleaded.
McCarthy was born in Brooklyn and grew up on Long Island. She became a nurse and later married Dennis McCarthy after meeting on a Long Island beach. They had one son, Kevin, during a tumultuous marriage in which they divorced but reconciled and remarried.
McCarthy was a Republican when, on Dec. 7, 1993, a gunman opened fire on a train car leaving New York City. By the time passengers tackled the shooter, six people were dead and 19 wounded.
She jumped into politics after her GOP congressman voted to repeal an assault weapons ban.
Her surprise victory inspired a made-for-television movie produced by Barbra Streisand. Since that first victory in 1996, McCarthy was never seriously challenged for reelection in a heavily Republican district just east of New York City.
Some critics described McCarthy as a one-issue lawmaker, a contention she bristled about, pointing to interests in improving health care and education. But she was realistic about her legacy on gun control, once telling an interviewer:
'I've come to peace with the fact that will be in my obituary.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
30 minutes ago
- Business Insider
'A graveyard of companies': Climate tech startups are feeling the heat from Trump 2.0
Trump's new bill affects tax credits that benefited the clean energy sector and climate startups. It's spooked some climate founders who worked in industries relying on government subsidies. Many are now pivoting to new brands and geographies, and investors expect a reset. The Trump administration's proposed overhaul of green energy tax credits has jolted the climate tech sector — and investors and founders in the ecosystem are scrambling to make fallback plans. Cleantech stocks tumbled in May after a bill cutting tax credits for clean energy incentives passed through the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Now, founders and investors are concerned about the knock-on impact this could have on the country's climate tech ecosystem, which was burgeoning under the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA. They told Business Insider that Trump's bill has stifled startup growth ambitions, pushing them to scale back, pivot to new geographies, or shut down entirely. "There will be a graveyard of companies," Matthew Nordan, managing partner at clean tech fund Azolla Ventures, told BI. "And a lot of startups will hibernate to try to weather the storm." Early-stage startups are already beginning to feel the heat. In April, Spencer Gore, founder and CEO of Bedrock Materials, a sodium-ion battery startup, made an unusual announcement on LinkedIn: the startup would be returning most of its $9 million raised to investors and ceasing operations. The company had plenty of operational cash, but "it was the techno-economics that led us to pull the plug," Gore told BI, adding that the market conditions for climate tech startups in the US were hampered by waning industrial policy. Startups are pivoting and eyeing new geographies A byproduct of the new tax bill — and growing political backlash against ESG incentives — is that Europe is becoming more attractive for climate techs to set up shop. "There's a dramatic retrenchment to Europe occurring within climate tech startups now. It's broad-based, and the EU is doing the opposite of what the US is doing right now," Nordan told BI. Sam Kanner, the CEO of floating wind turbine startup Aikido, an Azolla portfolio company, told BI he's considering moving his company to Europe. Trump's executive orders have "put a chill on investor sentiment and project development in the US," he said. There are "no longer any grant opportunities" through the Department of Energy or other agencies, he added, which means its "go-to-market strategy is now completely focused on Europe." Blain said that startups in the EU could turn to government funding from bodies such as the European Investment Fund, adding that "energy prices make the Nordics very attractive" as a hub. Europe, in particular, has made significant headway in aligning regulatory frameworks with climate targets, which de-risks early-stage tech, said Todd Khozein, CEO of SecondMuse. Kanner said that the UK, France, and Norway had "enacted supportive policies which have had the opposite effect on investors in those ecosystems", encouraging private equity, infrastructure, and venture investors to back wind projects. Startups are also eager to look beyond Europe for expansion. "Generally speaking, the EU has made itself unattractive from a manufacturing standpoint, by over-relying on Russia. We'd look to Brazil, India, and the Middle East," Max Kufner, cofounder of carbon capture and utilization startup Again, told BI. "The Middle East is proving to be a viable partner in decarbonization." Right now, "a lot of climate tech entrepreneurs are asking themselves what it means to be an entrepreneur in the United States, and whether this is really the best place to attract and retain talent," Gore said. "What we're seeing right now with startups is similar to the playbook we saw with Trump 1.0. A lot of companies will make a push to rebrand themselves as energy security and resilience funds," Nordan said. Climate tech startups have had a rocky year The aftermath of a global tech downturn, rising interest rates, and mounting backlash against ESG incentives has made it increasingly difficult for climate tech startups to fundraise. In the first quarter of 2025, climate startups secured $10 billion, down 50% from the $20 billion raised in Q1 of 2024, per PitchBook data. Biden's IRA offered climate companies billions of dollars worth of subsidies, tax credits, and rebates. The Trump administration is now attempting to roll back parts of the $369 billion initiative. "Anything that relied on grants, that came out of the IRA, for first-of-a-kind (FOAK) projects, will be hit the hardest," Nordan said. For example, direct air capture startup Climeworks — which received a $50 million US government grant in 2024 — laid off over 100 employees in May. Its CEO told Bloomberg that the startup's upcoming Louisiana plant would be delayed in light of the Trump administration's green policy decisions. Nordan anticipates more layoffs and shutdowns of companies that were dependent on government grants. Offshore wind and solar projects have also been in Trump's crosshairs. While these aren't usually venture-backed categories, the steep reduction in staff at the Department of Energy's loan program office, which provided debt funding to clean energy startups, will have a more debilitating impact on companies in these sectors, Matthew Blain, an investor at Voyager Ventures, told BI. Still, investor appetite for nuclear fusion, long-duration energy storage, and startups making data centers more efficient has accelerated, partly due to the AI boom, which requires immense energy.


Boston Globe
32 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump was wrong to bomb Iran. Democrats must be the antiwar party.
At a moment when our country is looking for strong antiwar leadership, Democrats must be the party of peace — peace abroad and good-paying jobs at home. Being the party of peace does not mean that we are the party of pacifism or a party of isolationism. It means that we oppose wars of choice. It means that we reject the Beltway establishment that is pushing for war. War is a terrible thing: It is economically costly, it tears apart families, and innocent people die. Wars should only be fought in the face of an actual attack or imminent threat of attack, and then only when diplomacy has been exhausted and there is no way to repel the attack except through force. They should not be fought for territorial expansion, glory, or regime change. Advertisement Vietnam was a war of choice, which the United States should not have fought. The Iraq War was a war of choice that Advertisement How do Democrats become the antiwar party? We can start by standing firmly for diplomacy, the Constitution, and for our priorities at home — good-paying jobs, affordable health care, education — instead of endless conflict. Trump should not have ordered strikes on Iran. It is in America's national security interest to stop Iran from having a bomb, but the US attack reportedly only What comes next is most important. We need to ensure that the cease-fire holds and that we have diplomacy that prevents Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. We know that diplomacy works. Former president Barack Obama's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action limited enrichment to Advertisement We also need to prevent any further escalation with Iran without the authorization of Congress. That is why Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and I introduced a bipartisan It is easier to start a war than to end one. Democrats have to be the voice of restraint and principled diplomacy. As the party of peace, we can offer a vision — one where we invest in improving the lives of working-class people. That is how we build a stronger democracy where everyone can thrive.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Comedian Andrew Schulz claims Harris campaign ‘blatantly' lied about setting up a podcast interview
Comedian and podcast host Andrew Schulz accused the Harris campaign of 'blatantly' lying about his team not reaching out to them during the election on Saturday. In an interview with the New York Times' 'The Interview' podcast, Schulz described his efforts to reach out to Democrats like Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg to appear on his 'Flagrant' podcast during the 2024 election. Advertisement He claimed the Democrats not only rejected him but accused his team of being 'podcast bros' who were 'sexist, bigoted and racist.' Schulz said he tried to set up an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris as well, but her campaign 'blatantly lie[d]' and said he did not reach out. 'It's wild to blatantly lie when not only did I reach out — Charlamagne, who's working with them, reached out,' Schulz said. 'Mark Cuban, who's a surrogate, reached out, and we reached out, and they blatantly lie. 'Then when people write articles about it, they'll say, 'Andrew says he reached out to Kamala, but we reached out to the Kamala people, and they said that never happened.' So what is the reader supposed to interpret that as?' Advertisement He added, 'I think it's an indictment on me, because it's almost like calling me a liar.' 3 Andrew Schulz recently appeared on an episode of 'The Interview' podcast and discussed the 2024 election. The Interview / YouTube 3 Schulz insisted that his team contacted the Harris campaign and was rejected. The Interview / YouTube Fox News Digital reached out to Harris, Charlamagne and Cuban for comment. Advertisement Schulz acknowledged that he has since spoken to progressive figures like Buttigieg and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. He believed the reason was that prior to the election, Democrats felt that they didn't need to go on podcasts like his to reach voters. Schulz and his 'Flagrant' podcast interviewed President Donald Trump during his campaign in October. 3 Schulz claimed that the Harris campaign lied about him not reaching out to set up an interview in 2024. Connor Terry/ZUMA / Advertisement He said after the interview he felt Trump went from having 'no chance' of winning the presidency again to 'winning by a landslide.' Also on The Times podcast, Schulz described himself as a lifelong Democrat who voted for Trump. '[M]y vote was more like I voted against a Democratic institution that I feel was stripping the democratic process from its constituents. I didn't like the way things were going, and Kamala was saying, Yeah, we're going to keep doing that,' he said.