Actually yes, if the rest of the population didn´t see raping and stealing as a big fuzz.
The laws in a country follow the needs of the population, what´s "right" or "wrong" isn´t the same throughout history, and a law that incriminates such a large part of the population just undermine the respect for the law.
While I'm with you on the relationship between laws and behavior, it has to be noted that it's far more complicated than what you're implying in this reply to Xenophobe. Laws are not merely based on the perception of what's right/wrong among those who vote them (or those who represent the voters), as is testified by the existence of laws against, for instance, white-collar crimes your average Joe cannot even comprehend, much less have a formed opinion about. Laws can also be very unpopular: a particularly strict measure against violating a low speed limit, for instance, would hardly find anyone affected
actively in favor, no matter the risk for their own safety. Which is precisely the point: the community is not encouraged to promote laws punishing acts we really really hate, but those that are more efficient to limit damage for both the individual and the group.
I feel confident to say that everybody raping or murdering - as unlikely as it is - would result in the collapse of the community before the idea of even changing the law could cross any authority's mind. And what if it does? Why, I'm going to stick the one-eyed gopher in that authority's cotton-pampered ass, you know what I'm sayin'? You're imagining a state of severe disobedience, which is not conductive to any kind of
reform, only to a bloody overthrowing of social structures as they are. To that, a new series of rules will inevitably follow, and you know what is the very first thing they'll ban? Murder, rape, any other form of disruptive violence. Saying that a system could exist without those [edit: the rules, not the violence] means assuming their absence wouldn't result in instant disgregation of the system itself.
This is the reason why I side with Xenophobe on this topic. I don't find your objection that frequently disobeyed laws are not going to last absurd, no, but it's still a little out there if taken out of context. Copyright laws are certainly not the foundation of the modern world, but until intellectual property has found its way to survive and prosper in the Internet age, no matter how many people do it and how many do it without getting caught, the laws will remain because they protect an interest with enough representation (in the vast majority of countries) to be considered worthy of protection.
Also, your numbers are not that meaningful: many more people run a red light than download illegal music off the Internet, and have been doing so for the past 80-100 years, but I don't see the interest for fewer deadly accidents waning any time soon.
The above is not a defense of the RIAA or similar, which I heartily despise.
. They're Swedish, ye know? It's funny because most Swedish metal bands have a better quality than most of the rest. e.g. with Dragonland, I think they're quite above the normal Power Metal bands 
