Answer:
The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that the exclusionary rule applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and to evidence gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. However, the rule does not apply in civil cases, including deportation hearings. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza.
Answer:
i believe the constitution would not allow for this change to occur, and if it was to be changed there would be a lot of informing inhabitants of changes to law, massive societal changes will occur from different beliefs in different states.
It would be more dangerous if the cars bounced off. This is because the airbags will deploy if the car stops, leaving them only with the injuries they have. However, if they bounce off, they can hit additional cars or accidently fall off a cliff. The damage opportunity is worse if they bounce off.
I hope this helps! :)
