I just read a few of the judges’ opinions. What you write is likely, as those in majority found very narrowly for the plaintiff’s particular non-violent crime. However, in their opinions they were not able to find longstanding historical precedent for violent felons. In fact, it is only recently, 1962, that became a blanket law only in terms of length of sentence, not based on violent or nonviolent offenses, determined lifelong loss of 2a rights. It takes going back to the Firearms Act of 1934 to find a limited number of violent offenses that required lifetime loss of 2a rights. It seems that was not long enough ago for these judges. They look much further back, towards our nation’s founding. The USSC ruling for Bruen does not specify how far back in history to find laws restricting use of firearms, nor does it address violent vs. nonviolent felons. But given the majority opinion, it seems likely these specifics will one day require a ruling from the USSC to further clarify.
I am by no means a legal scholar or expert. That is just my take on reading the opinions. The leftists on this court read like, well leftists. It was tortured, so I did not read all of their opinions. I only assume the vast majority of judges in the nation are of that ilk.
Always read between the lines, considering the agenda of the state. They are relentless and long game.