The discussion reviews the historical origins of the rule and the results flowing from its application, contending that only the undeniably guilty benefit from it and that it offers innocent victims neither protection nor remedy against violations of their constitutional rights. Furthermore, the rule sabotages internal disciplinary efforts of the police, thrusts an intolerable burden upon the courts, and warps the administration of justice. The objectives of reform should be to return responsibility for disciplining the police to the executive branch, provide prompt and effective guidance to the police, make sure the criminal goes to jail, offer a remedy to innocent victims, and make the fourth amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures a practical reality. It is proposed that any reform program completely abolish the exclusionary rule. Alternative enforcement remedies under consideration include internal discipline by the law enforcement agency, external control of individual law enforcement agencies by the executive branch, civil action by the victim of the illegal search against the government agency, and a minitrial of the offending officer after the principal criminal case. The above remedies are considered preferable to the proposed 'good faith' exception. A total of 55 footnotes are provided.