Should Qualified Immunity be repealed?

I think Qualified Immunity should be repealed because I don't want state agents being allowed to kill you and get away with it.  But there are 2 sides to every coin, so I'm curious as to why the supporters of Qualified Immunity defend their position.

Qualified immunity protects fed, state, local public officials from legal action against them UNLESS their actions clearly violate the natural, legal, or constitutional rights of the offended individual[s]. This is because those officials have the sworn duty to uphold those individuals' rights as stipulated. My daughter is an EMT. She has that sworn duty to uphold those rights of individuals with whom she has been entrusted by society to protect and preserve their lives and their rights wherever and whenever possible within the law. Her actions dictate her compliance with her sworn duty.

If qualified immunity  allows for government officials to get prosecuted if they violate constitutional rights of people, does this mean that a police officer shooting someone for having a gun (when that right is protected by the 2nd amendment) or a police officer killing someone over stealing a $20 bill (violates the 8th amendment) would mean that that particular police officer would get prosecuted?  If so, how come we haven't seen tyrannical police officers being put in jail for abuse of power?

Because maybe you don't bother to inquire?

This is an old report, but it discounts your assumptions of "How come..."

As I said, maybe because somebody doesn't show the initiative to find out for themselves. Your tutorial fee with be forthcoming.

Why?

Because that is how a hierarchical system works.

Law and fairness is a secondary and variable issue, depending upon where one has either, the fortune or misfortune to be.

I don't know, I'm not really 'for or 'against it, as I don't have a great understanding of it or it's implications myself.