I have served in both roles, as a climber and as a rescuer. While the case seems clear to many non-climbers, it is not as acceptable to a climber when it comes to a "beacon" issue. As a climber, I would not particularly want the extra weight and responsibility of a beacon and in the case of the recent Mt. Hood rescue, the beacon is similar to ones used to track animals in wildlife studies, it does not alert anyone that you are in trouble, it merely sends a signal that can be tracked and triangulated. That requires a phone call or some other means to let potential rescuers know you need to be located.
A simple $99 GPS unit and the phone together can accomplish the same results faster, since you can identify your precise location.
I can see issues where a climber may have a "beacon" and expect rescue and no one can get a strong enough signal to arrive at a location. Again, the type they are suggesting requires some form of notification to alert rescuers to start looking. What if the party that was on that particular climb had divided gear differently in the party and the beacon ended up with the group that did not fall and continued off the mountain? Rescuers would then not known what area to look in perhaps. The reality of this situation was that the beacon provided some assistance, but they already knew the approximate location from the other half of the climbing party. Had it been another group with a "beacon" that all stayed together and needed assistance, the rescue party would have had to try to locate the signal with the entire mountain as a search area. It could have taken days to attain a signal and narrow down the position. The "beacon" that is being discussed is not a PLB, it is a radio transmitter like the ones used to track animals in studies, that is a really different item with very different possibilities.
My personal take on the beacon requirement is that it is a bad idea not so much because of false sense of security, but because there is no truly positive potential. It is merely an aid to rescue parties and not a guaranteed locator.
My personal take on the PLB is that it is much more effective but because it takes a proprietary battery that is not user or field serviceable, the PLB is not a device that can be relied on that much either. There are circumstances that I could see taking one with the understanding that it may not work if needed.
I also would rather take a sat phone and a GPS if I was worried about needing a rescue. Reason; calling someone and actually talking to a live person and providing a GPS plot to them would do wonders for my morale in a bad situation. Turning on a PLB and wondering if anyone was getting the message and wondering when the battery and signal was going to die would not do a lot of positive things to my thought process.
I think the locator is great for aviators and mariners, as has been proven many times. It is also a requirement on most vessels and aircraft. There are also many instances when boats and planes go down and no signal is ever received.
I hope all this makes some sense, bottom line it should be your choice and not someone legislating it to you!