CraigC said:The holster is probably worth almost as much as the gun (sans ivory).
AND. YOUR BASIS FOR THAT STATEMENT IS "WHAT", PLEASE?
CraigC said:The holster is probably worth almost as much as the gun (sans ivory).
The going rate of floral carved Heiser leather.HAWKEYE#28 said:CraigC said:The holster is probably worth almost as much as the gun (sans ivory).
AND. YOUR BASIS FOR THAT STATEMENT IS "WHAT", PLEASE?
Yeah, I'm lost on that too. I can't find where it says a pre-1955 consumer-owned ivory piece can't be sold in the U.S. after Jan. 1, 2015.zoyt said:P89DC-
Thanks for info. I did not read the Jan 1, 2015 deadline in the link you provided. Where is that date noted?
Z.
zoyt said:Hawk-
OK. I always hear better when I'm shouted at! It seems reasonable to assume that Ruger would not have put out ivories without their trademark on them. I do suppose that the same "vendor" that supplied the medallioned ivories to Ruger could also have been selling the same ones without the medallions in the secondary market. Just my thoughts. I don't much care at the end of the day...just want to peddle these ivories.