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.

Example Input: Since civilian marksmanship programs commonly hold civilians to a higher standard than law enforcement officers, would't that mean that in all propreity we should be working to ban cops carrying guns on planes as opposed to law abiding citizens?
Example Output: Valid

Example Input: You can debate that without guns there would be more deaths to other weapons although you can't debate it would be to the same extent as gun murders and crimes would be.
Example Output: Valid

Example Input: I worry that the reduction of gun ownership will increase crime rates even in households with a gun.
Example Output:
Valid