California, an incubator for leftist ideology, took on more shame last week with some executive and legislative actions that are — in Hillary Clinton terminology — deplorable.

Law enforcement took the biggest hit.

Recently, a bystander in Victorville, California, recorded a man repeatedly punching a female San Bernardino deputy in the face.

During the fight, the suspect gained control of her gun and could be seen shooting at the deputy as she ran toward deputies arriving to back her up. The suspect, shot in the ensuing gunfight, was transported to a local hospital while the deputy was treated for her wounds sustained in the fight.

The incident received no national media coverage, so there was little attention outside of some social media feedback.

“Don’t worry Governor Newsom,” one person tweeted. “No one refused to help, so no 15 second political video clip to be had. Sorry.”

The sarcastic reaction refers to Gov. Gavin Newsom signing off on an 1872 bill that no longer requires any “able-bodied person 18 years of age or older” in the state to help an officer who requests assistance during an arrest. Citizens faced a potential misdemeanor charge of up to $1,000 if they refused to help officers who asked for their assistance.

California Democrats responded typically. Sen. Bob Hertzberg, who sponsored the bill, said the original law “belongs in the history books, not the law books.” Democratic Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove referred to the original law as “a vestige of a bygone era.”

The California State Sheriff’s Association, meanwhile, noted that there are times when officers need an extra hand.

“There are situations in which a peace officer might look to private persons for assistance in matters of emergency or risks to public safety, and we are unconvinced that this statute should be repealed,” the CSSA said in a statement.

In another action, lawmakers dropped an explicit definition of “necessary” that previously had said officers could use deadly force only when there is “no reasonable alternative.” Lawmakers said removing the explicit requirement helps officers try to de-escalate confrontations.

The bill’s sponsor, Democratic Assemblywoman Shirley Weber of San Diego, said the law addressing the use lethal force by officers, “changes the culture of policing in California.”

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors, meanwhile, unanimously voting to declare the National Rifle Association a domestic terrorist organization, claiming that the NRA “musters its considerable wealth and organizational strength to promote gun ownership and incite gun owners to acts of violence.”

“The National Rifle Association spreads propaganda that misinforms and aims to deceive the public about the dangers of gun violence,” the resolution continued. “The leadership of National Rifle Association promotes extremist positions, in defiance of the views of a majority of its membership and the public, and undermine the general welfare.”

Catherine Stefani, who wrote the legislation, said the NRA is to blame for all recent mass shootings.

The NRA called the resolution a “reckless assault on a law-abiding organization, its members and the freedoms they all stand for” and a “ludicrous stunt” aimed to “distract from the real problems facing San Francisco, such as rampant homelessness, drug abuse and skyrocketing petty crime, to name a few.”

Conservatives on the right feel that disarming civilians and not helping police only promotes chaos and empowers criminals.

The latest actions hamper California law enforcement, which has already seen its ranks shrinking due to retirements and the recession. Would-be officers must complete stringent physical agility and psychological tests, sit for two interviews, take a written exam, and pass a background check and polygraph test.

One police source noted that some agencies have seen 98.5 percent of applicants fail somewhere in the screening process.

Imagine if California lawmakers had to go through that kind of stringent testing and training before taking a seat in the state assembly.

Considering the condition of California governance these days, a leadership turnover in the Golden State would be a good thing.

By Jim Zbick | tneditor@tnonline.com