Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
But the federal government isn't the one doing this taxation, the state of California is which is why your tangent is pointless. You earlier implied an argument that by making guns more expensive, they're violating the 2nd amendment, which was disproven. If you need further rational, an 11% tax on a good isn't an undue burden regardless, nor is it an infringement no more than direct taxation of income is an infringement.
Let’s do some quick real world situation math.

Let’s say a brand X modern striker fire pistol costs $400. Now apply a 11% federal tax + 11% California tax = 22% or $88 in this example. That $400 pistol now costs the consumer $488. Now you’re a poor broke mofo, right? Are you going to lie and say $88 extra a poor person would need to pay isn’t excessive and could make a necessary tool to defend their life outside of their budget? What is to stop California from increasing that tax to 1000% in the future? Do you only want rich people, their private security, and police & military to be able to afford guns? Do you realize the United States Revolution was kicked off after a 10% import tax on British tea?