"The original understanding of the Second Amendment was neither an individual right to self-defense nor a collective right of the states, but rather a civic right that guaranteed that citizens would be able to keep and bear those arms needed to meet their legal obligation to participate in a well-regulated militia. Nothing better captured this constitutional ideal than the minuteman. Citizens had a legal obligation to outfit themselves with a musket at their own expense and were expected to turn out at a minute’s notice to defend their community, state, and eventually their nation. Although each side in the modern debate claims to be faithful to the historical Second Amendment, a restoration of its original meaning, re-creating the world of the minuteman, would be a nightmare that neither side would welcome. It would certainly involve more intrusive gun regulation, not less. . . . Gun control advocates might blanch at the notion that all Americans would be required to receive firearms training and would certainly look askance at the idea of requiring all able-bodied citizens to purchase their own military-style assault weapons."Saul Cornell, A Well-Regulated Militia: The Founding Fathers and the Origins of Gun Control in America, Oxford University Press, 2006. Which of the following Supreme Court cases is most relevant to the topic of the article? * 2 points Engel v. Vitale (1962) Baker v. Carr (1962) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) McDonald v. Chicago (2010)