I also dont think many pilots continue into IMC when not qualified to do so because they have a chute.
Perhaps, perhaps not. The vast majority of the CAPS deployments, however, strongly suggest otherwise...as shown here. Virtually every case has been pilots going where they ought not, then unnecessarily resorting to the panic button.
In fact I'd take a bet with you that the majority of these accidents would have happened just the same if the aircraft didnt have a chute.
You'd lose, of course, because in absence of the ability to alter history, you'll be forced to concede that these mishaps did involve the parachute system, and in several cases were caused by the parachute system. The one, you'll recall, which Cirrus states should be "expected to result in the destruction of the airframe, and possible severe injury or death to the occupants."
That parachute system.
Most pilots were very inexperienced, several hundred hours. What we have here are people who can afford to buy an airplane, but not the common sense to go with it, who arrogantly step well beyond their capabilities. Cirrus has used the parachute system as a major selling point...
look what we have here...a safety device that will save your life (or result in the destruction of the airframe and possible severe injury or death to the occupants)...buy this product...it looks just like your car inside...it's modern, safe...and...did we forget to mention the parachute?
This is a common enticement. I see pilots all the time who think it's okay to fly light airplanes in the ice...because it's got hot props, or boots, or...pick your poison. It's got TKS...everything will be okay. Just like having a parachute, icing equipment is a justification in many cases to do something stupid...remain in ice when at best the equipment should be used for getting out of an encounter, and never to intentionally enter it. Just yesterday I spoke with the owner of a Seneca II who was waiting for a hot windscreen plate so he could go blast off into the ice.
Do parachutes entice pilots to do stupid things? Yes. Civil pilots and military pilots both. Big interiors entice pilots to load the airplane up...I can't count the number of times I've heard said of the Cessna 182 or 206, "It's a big truck. Anything you can fit inside, it can carry." And pilots do. Give a pilot an inch, often as not, he will take a mile...and yes, I do have a VERY low opinion of pilots in general. I have long maintained that 90% of the pilots out there aren't worth their weight in dirty salt...and based on global experience in nearly every facet of aviation out there so far, I'm still convinced this is true.
Make your bet, then.
The Cirrus is just another example of an "advanced" aircraft that lulls the pilot into thinking it is more capable aircraft than it is, the chute makes very little difference and is not the factor you believe it to be.
Again, the data shows otherwise, as do the advertisements and the comments of owners by and large. Do a survey to find out how many though the CAPS system was a factor in their decision to purchase, and in the support of their spouse or partners...and you'll find that the vast majority see it as a major selling point.
As far as advanced...it's another puddle jumper with curvy lines and a high price tag...that's about it.