to be honest if you look through mine and others posts on the subject we are not against the concept of the CAP.
What we are against is the PILOT putting themselves in situations which they wouldn't be in without it. with the excuse that it is now an acceptable risk because of the CAP.
And I am sure we could be accused of have more feelings about the waste of a perfectly airworthy airframe than some
wit making an attempt at a Darwin award entry. And to be honest guilty as charged.
And most of us work on the theory that the once the airframe fails its only job left on this world is to ensure the survivability of the soft centre. And none of us would think twice about using it in a manner that would ensure its destruction but meant everyone survived.
Its the go no go based on if a chute is fitted that is the problem and the current skills for the mission being on the stick.
Now if the chute means the risk level is raised and the perceived skill requirement is lower because of it then the CAP is a bad idea. If it makes no difference its a good one.