We would like you to assess the QUALITY of each of the following argument (discussing Gun Control) and determine if the argument is Valid or Invalid. A valid argument is clearly interpretable and either expresses an argument, or a premise or a conclusion that can be used in an argument for the topic of gun control. An invalid argument is a phrase that cannot be interpreted as an argument or not on the topic of gun control.

Input: Consider Input: But guns aren't likely to do anything whatsoever, any more than cars are likely to drive or hammers are likely to strike.

Output: Valid


Input: Consider Input: If a registered gun owner uses his gun to commit a crime, (besides running the risk of threatening armed citizens) he would be easily tracked down and apprehended.

Output: Valid


Input: Consider Input: So if we have Article 1 then it's only reasonable to assume that the militia clause of the Second Amendment has nothing to do with militia duties and responsibilities of any sort.


Output: Valid