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.

Ex Input:
As a federal enclave they must not be allowed to disregard the Constitution, and instead must be forced to obey only the federal laws already on the books and no others.

Ex Output:
Valid

Ex 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.

Ex Output:
Valid

Ex Input:
I agree that law abiding citizens should be free to bear arms, but in the very amendment in question it describes the "militia" to bear arms as "well regulated".

Ex Output:
Valid