We would like you to assess the QUALITY of each of the following argument (discussing Death Penalty) 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 death penalty. An invalid argument is a phrase that cannot be interpreted as an argument or not on the topic of death penalty.

Example Input: There are many abstracts (short summaries of the entire paper) printed in this link.
Example Output: Invalid

Example Input: Basic necessities, like cable TV, vending machines, movies, exercise equipment, educational abilities, libraries, computer access, free medical care, perhaps a job to occupy time.
Example Output: Invalid

Example Input: For the time being, I've moved the Old Testament Law debate to a newly created thread, since this has become a thread about the Old Testament Laws in general, and not the death penalty in particular:
Example Output:
Invalid