Then why have laws, limits or restrictions of any kind? Obviously man is incapable of following the Golden Rule. Many are just too stupid and need to be told what not to do. Do you honestly believe that murder, rape, robbery, etc., rates would diminish if there weren't laws against the aforementioned?
No stealing, assault, murdering, rape, nor treason?
Fraud is stealing (you aren't getting what you pay for). Abortion is Murder.
Even with just a few laws you will still have lawbreakers, but the rules will be easier to understand and harder to circumvent.
Do you honestly think the presence of a few paragraphs in a book somewhere will stop anyone from doing anything they are determined to do?
Only moral people or people who fear losing something or people who just have no desire to break them will obey them, anyway.
But ours isn't a situation where the only choices are literally millions of overlapping and often conflicting laws and regulations, versus no laws at all.
Those powers not granted specifically to the Federal Government were reserved to the States and the people.
There is a broad middle ground which can be far less invasive and overbearing than the mess we have now, more responsive to the needs of an area, and requires far fewer extra-Constitutional Federal agencies and officers to enforce.
Let the Federal agencies return to the task of 'guarding the guards' and guarding the borders, rather than be the primary enforcers of those state laws, and be the bastion against corruption rather than the source of it.