My one major issue with this and its companion house bill, is that it could potentially stop initiatives at the state level to fix state law. For example, it could stop any momentum within California to fix their may issue law to shall issue law, or even constitutional carry, as it is possible that Pro-2nd A residents of that state can now get a NV CCW and carry in CA, so what is the incentive for them to fix CA's law. The same holds true for NY, NJ, HI, MD, DC, etc etc. The residents of those states, now have a work around, and now potentially have no reason to lobby their individual states to respect the 2nd ammendment.
Am I saying this will happen? I don't know and personally I would welcome all visitors to NV to carry a means to defend themselves without the need for a permit (constitutional carry), however while we do have the permitting process is in place, then I feel that both bills should be amended to read a resident permit from your home state unless your state does not issue permits (VT, IL) then a non-resident permit is valid. I do see this as usurping soverignity of the states to subjucate their citizens with regards to residents of that state circumventing state law and obtaining permits from other states, as I've stated before fix your state laws instead of skirting them.
Which is why in my personal opinion I Like Nevada's language that if you are a resident of the state of NV then you must have a Nevada CCW to carry in Nevada. Flame on