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: Police are routinely armed with bullet-resistant armor, have a partner, can call for backup, and are able to carry large caliber firepower.

Output: Valid


Input: Consider Input: So it seems that in the case of DC the justification for protecting the right to bear arms is lacking.

Output: Valid


Input: Consider Input: What I wonder is, if citizens/subjects are supposed to defend themselves with their bare hands (because guns are heavily regulated and knives are next ) why do police need to shoot people to stop them from causing harm?


Output: Valid