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: New proposals invariable seek to criminalize possession by the public, possession which is perfectly lawful and harms no one, creating victimless crimes, and malum prohibitum laws that reduce freedom.
Example Output: Valid

Example Input: I know people who want to limit ownership of guns to musket-type weapons as were used when the 2nd amendment was written and people that are for an insane amount of registration and background checks, etc.
Example Output: Valid

Example Input: And we've seen no hard evidence that works as proof to show that a "casual attitude" as you call it, presents any serious threat to anyone.
Example Output:
Valid