Passage Summary: A critic argues that just because violent lyrics are legal doesn't mean they are okay, especially since words have the power to change how people act.

Reasoning: The legal right to speak does not imply a moral obligation to speak; words influence human behavior; violence existed before violent music.

Analysis: Since this is a 'Most Strongly Supported' question, we must treat the critic's claims as facts and find a safe inference. The critic draws a sharp line between what is 'legal' and what 'ought' to be done, while emphasizing the influential power of language. We should look for an answer that suggests some legal speech may still be socially harmful or morally questionable. Avoid any choice that makes a definitive claim about whether violent music *causes* crime, as the critic only says words have the 'power to change' how we act, which is more nuanced.