OK, I am being overly pedantic but as you all know I like doing that, because I don't like the use of sloppy language and sloppy terminology used to cover up what IMHO starts with poor and outdated training of pilots and then continues through poor currency of those who do hang in there.
We all have a tendency, no matter how small, to chance flying in weather conditions to get home that we may decline if we were departing from our home base. It's real alright!
This is very true, but one has basically two choices:
(1) Ban all flights returning to one's base, unless the weather is CAVOK, or
(2) Try to analyse how decision making is affected by various psychological factors, and address that with appropriate training. One may find that the airlines got there first, however
Today, I had to get back home (as is usually the case on a Friday) so I did a flight in what most would call atrocious weather, and it was timed to use a gap between a trough and a cold front. The forecast for the destination was a possible 25kt crosswind component, right on the limit. I had 5hrs' fuel reserve, enough to get to Biarritz with FAA legal IFR reserves. The flight, 55kt headwind, and the landing (36kt more or less down the runway, windshear only about 10kt when I was expecting 20+) were in the end a complete non-event, with the benefit of the summer's bugs having got washed off. The place was like a graveyard, nobody was flying. I don't see anything wrong with their decisions, or with mine, but the point is that I looked at the data (including weather radar images) and made a decision to go based on the data, and (crucially) had an escape route in having enough reserve to go somewhere completely different. I think that training pilots to work it out like this is better than patronisingly telling them that it is better to be down here wishing they were up there than the other way round, etc, etc, etc.