Delaware safe surrender misses the point - too many laws, not too many criminals

At the end of this month in Wilmington there will be a "safe surrender" site at the New Destiny Fellowship church. Apparently more than 120,000 people have outstanding warrants for crimes as serious as felonies through minor infractions (misdemeanors) like failing to pay a traffic ticket, missing a court date or skipping out on a child-support payment. Police are hoping that a church as the "safe surrender" site will make people more likely to come in and clear up the situation. It is not amnesty but it allows the state to clear the backlog. They claim that if the crime is a non-violent one most people will go home that day with a clean slate. Judges from the various state courts systems and other court officials or law enforcement will be at the church to work through the cases.

It seems to me that 120,000 people in Delaware with warrants is a lot. In 2007 the Census estimated the population of Delaware was 864,764. Thus almost one in seven people in Delaware are wanted criminals for some reason. If that many people have warrants for their arrest then there are too many laws, not too many criminals.

From the Tao Te Ching:

18.
When the Tao Way is lost,
The multitude of laws and rules will appear.

57.
A country follows justice by a just code of laws.
A war is won by advanced knowledge of tactics.
A strong will makes a wish fulfilled.

Too many laws attract crimes,
Too much preparation for the war, brings war,
The multitude of wishes brings conflicts amongst people.

That is why the Wise One says:
"Don't have too many laws
And the people will govern themselves.
Think of peace and the people won't suffer.
Live a simple life and people will live in harmony."

Why isn't this double jepardy?

Philadelphia area residents have no doubt heard of the death of police officer William T. Barkley. They have also heard that his killer, William J. Barnes, has been charged with the murder. The surprising fact of the case is that the shooting that supposedly caused the death took place 41 years ago, and that Barnes already served 15 years in jail for the shooting.

The sad truth in this story is that the officer, Barkley, suffered paralysis from the shooting and had health problems the rest of his life. Still, I would have thought that justice was served when Barnes was convicted of the crime and served his time. The articles do not say what Barnes was convicted of so long ago, and so you can see how an overzealous prosecutor might pull out one of the many crimes that wasn't used 41 years ago, or the "new" one of murder and retry the case. Don't get me wrong, I think that if you commit a crime you should submit to justice and punishment for it, and it seems to me that that is what happened to Barnes. I have heard of charges moving from attempted murder to murder when a victim dies in the hospital days after the fact, but usually that happens long before a trial, conviction and serving a sentence. Barnes has already been denied bail for his "offense".

This is not the same as if they just discovered the murder from 41 years ago. Barnes is no great citizen, he has been in and out of jail his whole life until a recent "turnaround". All of that still seems irrelevant to the the fact that this really looks like double jeopardy. I am not a lawyer so I am sure I am missing an important point. The whole case looks like it will center around medical experts trying to prove or disprove that the infection that Barkley finally died from was a direct result of the injuries from 41 years ago. Shooting a police officer and 40 years of paraylsis are so emotionally charged that I don't expect a reasoned rational discussion of the facts. I would just like some lawyer to explain the basis for the murder charges.