The mentality that nothing could ever happen to make bailing out either viable, or preferable to riding it in, is usually just due to a lack of imagination.
In my community the notion of bailing out was laugable to many, particularly those whose crew stations are on the flight deck. It was a, "sure, give it the old college try, but you're just going to die halfway through the cargo compartment, as opposed to your crew station seat" kind of proposition. Granted it's not a heavy (AC-130), and is based on a platform that was designed to airdrop personnel and thus is configured to make exiting the aircraft in flight safe, but it was usually assumed that in any situation where you'd want to bail out the aircraft would be uncontrollable, dark, and for those who are familiar with the AC-130, full of obstructions in your way.
Then one day a crew found themselves over central Afghanistan (good luck finding a viable crash landing location) at a relatively low altitude (typical for the gunship) with a perfectly controllable aircraft that wasn't producing adequate thrust to maintain altitude. The crew was in the process of prepping for bailout when the issue was resolved, but had it not been, bailing out would have absolutely been the best option. Crash landing onto an 70% slope with a sheer cliff face at its end with no power isn't a highly survivable situation. I get that bailing out of a heavy is a much different proposition, but defending the stance that parachutes are worthless in a heavy is going to be a shitty one to have to own for the 5 minutes that you glide down to certain death when that one situation that you couldn't ever have imagined crops up.
The probability that they ever save a life being incredibly low, it's still easy insurance for a few hundred pounds.