ChrisN is far more elliquent than I and puts the case for gliders extremely well; but as usual those who only see things from their veiwpoint simply set his points to one side and insist on trying to spend their way out of danger at the expense of us "lesser" types.
ST,
Most of the time I find your aurguments balanced and sensible. However, I find the below quote to be pretty presumptuous and seeks to lump all who disagree with you into the category you describe (even if you do highlight the "probably").
These very same pilots who don't look out properly under "see and avoid", have no on-board collision avoidance equipment and don't think it a good idea to seek an ATC service are probably the very same ones who don't believe there is a problem. They fail to see other aircraft around them and therefore in their ignorance believe the sky is less busy than it really is.
Personally, I do all I can to be "visible" and keep good spatial awareness of those around me, but I do this within the limits of my budget or a/c type. I'm also very well aware of the problem.
You also seem to seek to elevate professional pilots to a status of immunity over the most common causes of "death by flying" that we humble amatuers succumb too ... ???? I think statistics would prove you wrong!
Hitting a glider in IMC is a tiny tiny risk in comparison to the others mentioned. Yes it IS a risk ... but just taking off in most aircraft probably presents a higher one! Why should the right to use natures energy be denied to glider pilots just to wrap those who seek to control all risk in cotton wool? If a good, light and cheap system was available then fine ... as yet there isn't one! When there is I'll be the first in line to buy one.
By the way, I often see aircraft whizzing along at a couple of thousand feet and blasting through cloud outside CAS. How safe is that?
SS