Protecting the 'Rights' of the Guilty

Maybe I'm jaded, cynical, or just downright mean. I seem to have lost my patience when it comes to those convicted of breaking the law trying to use that same law to protect the rights they gave up when they broke it (is this room spinning?). Here is one such case.

Inmates File Suit After Prison Bans Some Religious Books Over Terrorism Fears (FoxNews.com)

I'm not upset that these criminals want to read. I think their desire for reading religious material is a good thing. But doesn't breaking the law (the reason they are in prison) bring with it certain consequences like, say, losing the privileges of a free man? I guess I'm old fashioned. I just assumed that most intelligent, socially advanced people would know that laws are set up to maintain order and civility. When a person shows disdain for those laws and willfully breaks them they are, in essence, relinquishing their "right" to be protected by those laws. That just seems to make sense. But, I digress. I must remember that when entering the world of legalese the role of common sense often gets lost in the fine print.

UGH!

Send your UGH-worthy news stories to news@theughreport.com.