>>1. Karl Behr's grateful response to the fellow in the lifeboat who generously offered the use of his gun after he and his wife were through with it. There's just something so surreal about this.<<
I don't remember this. Could somebody elaborate on this for me, please? If the implication that a man and his wife used it on themselves in a lifeboat, that wouldn't make any sense, as they were in a lifeboat. Why would anyone need a gun in a lifeboat for that reason? I know that if I were in a lifeboat, and I had a gun, it would stay right in its holster, where it belongs.
As for the use of guns that night onboard by passengers for either suicide or the killing of another passenger, such stories have not been proven are are likely to be untrue. As I understand it, passengers were not allowed to carry arms, unless they had a reason (such as a police officer), but it's reasonable to presume that if a passenger did have arms, the those weapons would have been placed in storage for the duration. The only individuals who had guns that night were the officers, and the only confirmed use was for warnings (such as by Lowe when he got into his lifeboat and wanted to stop a stampede of people). It is not been confirmed that anyone had been killed through the use of a pistol. Murdoch's supposed suicide, for example (if it had been Murdoch), is just one of many stories; it has never been confirmed, despite a small host of eyewitness accounts that claimed that an officer shot himself.
As Catherine, states, though, there were many little interesting things that could/should be worthy of dramatization. The truth is, there's just too much, so everything can't be considered. Furthermore, a number of events are based on hearsay and can't be confirmed one way or another, so the tendency is to lean toward those famous, and affirmed, incidents. Still, it depends on the particular filmmaker and her/his preferences.