There are taxes on pens and computers... does that affect the first amendment?
There is a difference. Those taxes are general sales taxes. Perfectly reasonable and OK to have them. I pay sales tax if I am buying a computer, a set of dinnerware, a ream of paper, a new sofa, or pens. I do not have to pay a 10% excise tax on pens and an 11% excise tax on paper IN ADDITION to the 6.75% sales tax.
Actually, this issue was brought before the Supreme court as well. On March 29, 1983 the SCOTUS ruled in favor the Appellant in
Minneapolis Star v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue. The case was about a state tax on paper and ink used in newspaper publication. The Minneapolis Star & Tribune Company argued that this unfairly targeted the press and was a violation of the 1st amendment. The Supreme court agreed.
Minneapolis Star v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue
The ruling found that state tax systems cannot treat the press differently than any other business unless substantial justification exists. The state of Minnesota could demonstrate no compelling reason to justify imposing a special use tax on a select few newspaper publishers. Therefore, the tax was in violation of the First Amendment's Press Clause. The ruling was unique in subjecting state laws to strict scrutiny based on mere potential for censorship.
Replace "the press" with "gun and ammo manufacturers" and "First Amendment's Press Clause" with "Second Amendment" as well as a few bits and you would have a good argument against it.
It should be illegal to tax a right.
I see where you are going and it is good for you to make me justify my view.
It isn't illegal to tax a right. However it is illegal to pass a tax that SPECIFICALLY targets a right. A general sales tax on all new products, guns and ammo included, OK. A hidden excise tax that only applies to guns and ammunition, not OK.
We have the right to freedom of movement. A general tax on gasoline is OK. A tax for leaving and reentering your home state would be illegal. The SCOTUS defined freedom of movement in Paul v. Virginia as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."
As for "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States...." in the US constitution. The above court cases have established that there are limits in HOW the government can levy taxes.
Poll taxes were eliminated becasue it was a way to stop you from excercising your right to vote. You can always make your own firearms and produce your own ammo.
Ah, the same could have been said in "Minneapolis Star v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue". The state could have said, "You don't HAVE to buy paper and ink, you could always make your own."
That statement also has the same flaw as poll taxes. To make your own firearms requires significant amounts of money. Money that only the well off can afford. The poor could never afford such things. Same could be said about a reloading setup. What if the excise tax was 50%, 100%?
I'm not trying to be snarky or anything. Just poking and prodding everyones brains to see what we all come up with.