Is the Exclusionary Rule good or bad for the United States Criminal Justice System and the people of the United States?

Can it be found in the United States Constitution?

Is it the Law of the Land?

Did the Legislature make that law?

Why don't England, France, Italy, Germany, all the other countries of the world, have an equivalent law?

Why is the United States the only country to have such a law?

In point of fact, the United States did not have such a law until the Supreme Court decided in the 1960's that we ought to have such a law, when it applied Federal guidelines to the States via Mapp v. Ohio 1961. We went for over 170 years without said law and did just fine.

Why change it?

In point of fact, the Supreme Court decided in Boyd v. United States 1886 to throw out evidence that was obtained in violation of Boyd's 4th and 5th amendment rights. However, isn't that what the Supreme Court is supposed to determine, violations of Constitutional rights? Why make it a law though?

Shouldn't a case by case basis be used todetermine violations, not a law? After-all, "The Courts" purpose is to review cases for violations of Constitutional issues. It was not the intent or purpose of Federal District and Appellate Courts to review Constitutional violations, only the Supreme Court. Their authority in such matters was not to be delegated to any lower courts, yet that is what the Exclusionary Rule (law) does.

Also, shouldn't remedies for violation of the Constitution be penalties against the violator of our constitution, not against the society the Constitution was designed for? The Exclusionary Rule now makes society pay the price for the violations of a persons rights, instead of the person or entity that actually committed the violation of the Constitution. Is that morally right or just? Is that really ethical?

In fact, because of the unwieldiness of the "Rule", The Court has done mental and verbal gymnastics to circumvent the problems their "Rule" created.

How many exceptions have been created to get around the "Rule"?

Wouldn't it just be easier to just get rid of Judge Made Law, than to keep on making exceptions to it?

Who is going to determine whether it was Good Faith or not?

Who is going to determine if it equals a Purged Taint?

Who is going to determine Inevitable-Discovery?

Who is going to determine whether it is an Independent Source?

Are there anyproblems the justices created for us with their created "Rule"?