comment: >
  
  No, he doesn't. He's just saying this to pave over being a miserable failure at getting McCarthy installed. Even the MAGAs are abandoning him now, and it's driving him nuts.
context: You just wait until boebert or mtg pull their guns out on the house floor tomorrow. >
  
  So what would happen if a member brandished a firearm against another?  Sounds like the kind of thing the GOP would love, since dueling to resolve differences was a big thing in the time period they want to roll society back to. >
  
  If there were a speaker of the house, the speaker of the house would be required to have the sergeant at arms handle this with the mace of the house of US representatives, iirc...
  
  In accordance with the House Rules, on the rare occasion that a member becomes unruly, the Sergeant at Arms, upon order of the Speaker, lifts the mace from its pedestal and presents it before the offenders, thereby restoring order.
  
  There is precedent for this from the time that Charles Lafayette Bartlett was threatening another representative with a knife.
  
  It was used twice in the 1890s in incidents involving Representative Charles L. Bartlett, a fiery Georgia Democrat who hurled a volume of laws at one colleague and brandished a knife at another.
  
  If they actually used a gun to shoot at another representative on the house floor, that isn't quite the same as a duel and I would expect Capitol police to respond with Force. >
  
  
  If they actually used a gun to shoot at another representative on the house floor, that isn't quite the same as a duel and I would expect Capitol police to respond with Force.
  
  It would be pretty interesting to say the least. Do the capitol police have the authority to intervene between reps during a legislative session even if such a thing were occurring? I'm sure no one would fault them if they did, but it does seem like undiscovered country. >
  
  I am not aware of any provision of law that exempts them from ordinary criminal laws.