Not in this case. That would be awesome if that were the case, but the wording under wording under SB226 creates a confusing set of definitions for its active provisions which conflict with the definitions used under state law. I don't know if it could be interpreted in a new way, but if one were to read the law for understanding based upon its strict reading, it appears to me that the new law will only make it so that it is now impossible to obtain a permit to carry an antique firearm concealed without exempting antique firearms from NRS 202.350.
Nevada defines firearm under NRS 202.253 for the purposes of NRS 202.350, which would encompass black powder firearms, and NRS 202.253 definition of "firearm" under state law would not be repealed. NRS 202.350 prohibits the concealed carry of "pistols, revolvers, or other firearm and any other dangerous or deadly weapon." The new definition of "handgun", according to the language in SB226 (
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/SB/SB226_R1.pdf ) only applies from NRS 202.3653 to NRS 202.369 (and not to NRS 202.350). The new language of SB226 (and SB76) is intentionally designed to prevent the carry of firearms other than "handguns", because law enforcement was upset that people were lawfully carrying short barreled long guns with their concealed firearm permit. And the definition of "handgun" used (in SB226) is the federal definition.
After the passage of SB226, an antique firearm will still be defined as a firearm under NRS 202.3653 and it will still (arguably) be a dangerous or deadly weapon and thus will not be exempt from NRS 202.350. And even if both of those provisions were struck from NRS 202.350 (which is not happening in the present version of SB226,) the language of NRS 202.350 also describes the terms "pistols" and "revolvers" and these phrases will not necessarily be equivalent to "handgun" under the law. Arguably, a federally defined handgun will be a "pistol" or "revolver", but since "pistol" and "revolver" will no longer be defined under the law and the definition of "handgun" only applies to a section of code outside of NRS 202.350, even the phrases "pistol" or "revolver" could encompass a percussion revolver still if those terms are held to be broader than "handgun." And it seems to me that it is probable that the terms "pistol" and "revolver" would be held to be a types of firearms (as defined under state law NRS 202.253).
In the section where the federal definition of "handgun" will apply, the law will specify that a person with a concealed firearm permit may carry concealed any "handgun" and that all training for the course revolves around "handguns". So after obtaining such a permit one would have a permit to carry a concealed "handgun" (as defined by federal law) but no permit to carry concealed a percussion revolver or a rifle, as neither qualify as a "handgun" under federal law.
The only mechanism I can see that would allow for concealed carry of a percussion revolver would be if the language of the federal definition of handgun was interpreted in a different way than federal courts would.
Under federal law (
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C44.txt ), antique firearms are not held to be firearms:
(3) The term "firearm" means (A) any weapon (including a starter
gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to
expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or
receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm
silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include
an antique firearm.
And a handgun is defined by federal law to be a type of firearm:
(29) The term "handgun" means -
(A) a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be
held and fired by the use of a single hand; and
(B) any combination of parts from which a firearm described in
subparagraph (A) can be assembled.
Under federal law, a percussion revolver is not a handgun, because a handgun is a firearm, and a percussion revolver is not a firearm. Hence why federal law does not prohibit minors from possession of a percussion revolver (NOT A HANDGUN) and why federal law would allow one to be shipped directly to your door from across state lines (NOT A FIREARM).
If the courts of Nevada decided to take the wording of the federal definition of handgun without taking into consideration the wording of the federal definition of firearm, it is possible that the state could hold that a permit applies to a percussion revolver. But this conclusion would seem to an illogical way to read the law based strictly upon wording. Especially because the intent of using the federal definition of a handgun was supposed to be so that if the federal law changed the definition of a handgun, then what the permit applied to would change to be the same.