the Stamp Act was just one part of the whole 'changing the status quo' that the colonists were rebelling against. For decades, the UK had been treating the colonies with benign neglect, not levying all that many taxes, and the ones that were present were often not collected (colonial tax collectors were notoriously bad at their jobs). Smuggling was technically illegal, and mercantilism was supposed to limit the colonials' marketing opportunities, but in reality, the colonials were superb smugglers and did business pretty much as they pleased. Plus, there were issues such as the colonies' desire to expand east that Britain seemed determined to stand in the way of. While the French in Canada were a danger, the colonists were tolerant of the UK's whims, but once they were gone, they hoped to go back to 'business as usual'... only to find that the UK intended to crack down. Even when the rebellion finally broke out, it was at first not a movement for independence, but a desire to restore the status quo. Only later did it change.
So, to answer the OP, if it had been only the Stamp Act, then yes, it would have been an overreaction. With everything else, it wasn't surprising that rebellion happened..