Gonna be honest? It doesn’t matter how many times you confirm to me that that is unloaded. There is zero chance I am standing surrounded by trainees with their anti-tank rifles pointed at me.
It is also just genuinely fascinating how short of a period that anti-tank rifles were actually good at what they were designed for. Has to be single digit years outside of the wars with large amounts of legacy equipment, right? Because it was pretty much the opposite of ATGMs where armor rapidly outpaced any attempts at making a high enough caliber bullet.
Still awesome for anti-materiel purposes but that is really it.
In terms of dedicated anti-tank rifles, yeah, they were of marginal concern in the interwar period, and then had like, three years of glory in WW2 when they were somewhat effective, and then joined the dust heap of history.
Funny enough though, the Browning .50 Cal machine gun was originally made with the intention of being able to hose down tanks in WW1 with armor-piercing bullets. War finished before the gun was, though.
It is true that as HEAT based weapons proliferated and as armor got better, that did really spell the end of AT rifles in any meaningful number. However, in early WW2 AT rifles were a big enough concern that it prompted the Germans to introduce schürzen (armor side skirts) to their tanks.
Loaded or not, that’s probably not the spot I’d choose to stand.