To me, the post by exnavy was a form of snark, because we all know that the police can't protect everyone, and the Supremes understood, that because of civil lawsuits, it would collapse the system if officers owed a duty to protect someone or everyone. The reply was also snark because frogs can't fly, and it was an unnecessary snark.
When i posted the supremes ruling it in reference to the whining in the article. It was the frog comment that was to you. What is a snark.