I think that, at a high level, the reason why we have qualified immunity is that law enforcement is sometimes a dangerous job. I’ve never personally been in law enforcement, but I’ve heard it’s tough, and sometimes you can be in difficult situations where you really need to act quickly. If the law allows some level of personal discretion, then law enforcement officers might have to act quickly and take some risks, and if they’re not protected by qualified immunity, then they’re responsible for their own actions.  
Do you think this means that they should have qualified immunity?
assistant
Probably not. In general, I think police officers should be accountable to the community for the way they’re using their power.  I’d say that on the “good” side, police officers are acting on behalf of the community in a way that’s dangerous and requires them to have a good idea of what they’re doing, and also a sense of being responsible to the community. On the “bad” side, I think some people will see that power as an opportunity to abuse their authority, and might try to shoot people they don’t like.
assistant
Should cops have qualified immunity?
user
That’s a tricky question! If I’m being perfectly honest, my knee-jerk reaction is “no,” because I know that most (but not all) human police officers are decent people who are there to protect and serve the public.  But then I realized I didn’t really know how to answer the question.  So let’s think about it together!
assistant
Well if they have qualified immunity then they can do lots of stuff like shooting people and other things and not have to worry about being tried for it. Is that good?
user