Playing devil's advocate here, you brush with a broad stroke in assuming that, "If a person decides that they don't want to follow ANY law, the whole system is kind of pointless."
Someone could easily argue that the legal system protects the people who have decided to follow laws--legalists; that is to say, those who follow the letter of the law as a matter of course--from those who violate those laws, and who might violate the rights of the legalists.
Further, I also see a possible counter to your point here: "This raises the question of what governments actually do when they create these 'laws' to give you 'rights.' Well that in itself is a logical fallacy, why would I need someone to give me permission to do what I am already able to do and aware enough to decide for myself?"
So, let's accept that everyone subject to these laws are both capable of doing what law permits, and that everyone is aware enough to decide whether or not to do something for themselves. Accepting that, we must ask about how these capacities of action and decision affect those subject to laws. In that case, then, we must acknowledge the capacity of the subject to decide upon a course of action that the law forbids. As an example, murder: one may decide to murder someone, and succeed at it. In that case, doesn't a law forbidding murder codify the victim's right to live, and protect the life of possible victims with a threat of imposing punitive measures?
I do believe (and would guess you believe the same) that "rights" precede "laws," and that the legal system functions largely as you described in saying, "while many people believe the legal system is built to protect you, it's actually put in place to control you," I just don't think your argument is airtight. In the interest of strengthening it, I've offered two examples with which one might argue that the legal system (or simply a legal system) does protect, or attempt to protect, the rights of those subject to that system. Certainly looking forward to reading any replies to the arguments offered above.
RE: The Illusion of Legality