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.

Those who claim that Australia suffered a "crime wave" as a result of new gun laws often cite as evidence unrelated figures for common assault or sexual assault (no weapon) and armed robbery (any weapon).
Valid

However although our constitution needs exceptions (no yelling "fire" in a movie theater, and background checks for guns), no rights in the bill of rights should be outright banned.
Valid

Why do you constantly try and oversimplify things by claiming that gun control will work, while at the same time not discussing matters relating to income, surroundings, upbringing, recidivism rates, prison sentences and other such matters?

Valid