The need for civil forfeiture demonstrates a clear failing of the system. The system says "we can't nail this person legally but we 'just know' they did something bad, so we'll break the rules." Same with warrantless wire tapping. The system is intended to err on the side of letting the guilty go, rather than infringe on the rights of innocent, not the other way around. If the government cannot figure out how to arrest and convict guilty people without resorting to unconstitutional measures, that's their failing.
I'm a realist though, and I accept the argument that criminals can be sophisticated enough to operate in that margin of error without getting caught. The system will need to get creative to handle these people, without being unconstitutional. Yes, I'm sure it is extremely hard work when compared to breaking the rules and calling it a day, but too bad. The willingness to put in extra work to avoid the illegal shortcuts is critical to preventing the total corruption of these institutions.
I'm a realist though, and I accept the argument that criminals can be sophisticated enough to operate in that margin of error without getting caught. The system will need to get creative to handle these people, without being unconstitutional. Yes, I'm sure it is extremely hard work when compared to breaking the rules and calling it a day, but too bad. The willingness to put in extra work to avoid the illegal shortcuts is critical to preventing the total corruption of these institutions.