Police officers should be trusted enough to go through houses of those who are suspected of committing crimes and respectfully search them. The Fourth Amendment was originally created to defend us from foreign armies stationed in America, coming into our homes and taking our things without reason. Police Officers are sworn to protect us and this country, not to trash our homes for their own amusement. To have the exclusionary rule in place not only insults the integrity of our nation's police officers, it sets criminals free as well.
Police should be held accounted instead of letting criminals off. Letting them of does no one any good, they go back to committing crimes and don't help society in any way. If this legislation actually passes it will change court prosecutions extremely and with help prosecute many more criminals regardless of how the evidence was recieved
While it's important that police officers and investigators should face consequences for collecting evidence in an unconstitutional manner, it's immoral that one of those consequences might be a miscarriage of justice. When evidence exists, it should always be allowed to have some bearing on a criminal case, regardless of how it was obtained.
The exclusionary rule is to protect a citizen from a police state, or a dictatorship. Although some say it obstructs justice, it does not. It makes those in charge of the law from breaking the law. If removed, how would one citizen protect themselves from other citizens, as well as law enforcement as a whole.
The exclusionary rule means that evidence is usually admissible in court when it was obtained in an unconstitutional way. This rule needs to be kept in place because it protects the rights of American citizens and makes sure that law enforcement uses the proper means of gathering evidence. Definitely should not be banned!