Anyway this is an idiotic bullshit argument in the context of George Floyd. The man was on the ground, unarmed with four police there. That police officer wasn't being asked to put his life on the line, so what you're saying is irrelevant.
To be fair, that officer was both fired and was arrested + charged, which in my understanding means neither the (mayor? department?) and the prosecutor do not think qualified immunity is merited in this case.
It does drive us to the important point: where is the threshold where qualified immunity is forfeited?
I'm more interested in hearing level-headed proposals.
Let judges decide what lawsuits are frivolous.
I don't know much about it, but taking "qualified immunity", which is evaluated by prosecutors and DAs, and moving it to a police organization (expecting police to police the police) doesn't sound like an improvement.
Perhaps it would work if it was coupled with some sort of a complete overhaul in the culture of policing, but I don't see how the "culture" changes from the outside.