In part 1 I attempted to show that the Boy Scout Uniform is not practical for most "Boy Scout activities". I stated, but did not show, that the practicality of the uniform is requisite for any part of the BSA's statement of the "Uniform" method being true. For review, here's the BSA's description of the uniform method:
The uniform makes the Boy Scout troop visible as a force for good and creates a positive youth image in the community. Boy Scouting is an action program, and wearing the uniform is an action that shows each Boy Scout's commitment to the aims and purposes of Scouting. The uniform gives the Boy Scout identity in a world brotherhood of youth who believe in the same ideals. The uniform is practical attire for Boy Scout activities and provides a way for Boy Scouts to wear the badges that show what they have accomplished.
Does it? When is the last time you saw a Boy Scout troop that was visible as a Boy Scout troop? I go to campgrounds a lot. I probably frequently see Boy Scout troops there, but I rarely know for sure because nobody wears the uniform camping anymore. About the only time people might see a Boy Scout troop in uniform is if they are at a Boy Scout meeting (in which case they aren't really "visible as a force for good" any more than the Rotary is at a Rotary meeting) or if the troop is one of the ones that wears their uniform in the car and you happen to see them at a gas station or something on the way to wherever they are going. If you saw a troop out working on an Eagle project, doing a conservation project, maintaining a trail, or even backpacking and following Leave No Trace guidelines then they would be "visible as a force for good and [creating] a positive youth image", but they wouldn't be wearing their uniform or recognizable as a Boy Scout troop. Even in my Wood Badge course, which should demonstrate extreme adherence to the methods, we did the conservation project out of uniform because the uniform doesn't launder that well and is too tight fitting to be used for hauling dirt around in.
I feel it is with good reason that these two statements are included in the same sentence. If we create a uniform that allows Boy Scouts to wear their badges, but it's only practical for Courts of Honor then people will only see awards at awards ceremonies, so you might as well give out pennants or trophies or put names on a plaque.
We have done pretty much exactly this. The main two places the uniform is still practical are regular meetings and Courts of Honor. Regular meetings are only practical if they are indoors (or in warm, dry weather) and not too physically demanding. Since the goal of the meetings should be to prepare for the outings, it should be the goal of every Scoutmaster to make the meetings as impractical as possible in the uniform. This leaves us with a uniform with the same ceremonial significance as a cap and gown. Many parts of the cap and gown have significance and indicate accomplishments of the wearer, but since they are only worn at ceremonies most people never see what accoutrements others have acquired.
I have to admit, I don't understand or like the wording of these statements. Is there something magical about the Boy Scout uniform that makes it like the sword in the stone, unable to be donned by those who are bereft of character? Do you develop more fitness by wearing a field uniform shirt than a dress shirt and tie? Given that the European associations are de-emphasizing the uniforms and the only thing the Asian associations seem to have in common is the neckerchief, would any uniform equally give an "identity in a world brotherhood of youth"?
The uniform does reinforce the other methods and help to further the aims and purposes of Scouting, though. There are patches on the uniform indicating the boy's patrol ("Patrol Method"), rank ("Advancement"), position ("Leadership Development"), religious recognition, conservation efforts, and learning in practical areas ("Personal Growth"), recent outings ("The Outdoors"), citizenship in the United States of America and membership in the BSA and a particular troop within the BSA ("Ideals"). Merit badges also remind us of the adult experts that the Scout has consulted in developing himself ("Association with Adults").
Many troops wear the uniforms while traveling because when wearing the uniform the Scout does seem to be in touch with the fact that he represents the Boy Scouts of America, the international Scouting Movement and the Ideals that they stand for. Sadly, the uniform cannot reasonably be worn the entire trip to further reinforce this.
I frequently hear complaints about getting parents to buy or scouts to wear the uniform. I also hear complaints about getting people interested in Scouting. I think these are linked. People have argued that the Boy Scout uniform is no longer "cool" because Scouting is no longer "cool". This seems reasonable, but a bit odd to me. When I was in High School a little over a decade ago I always went on "cool" vacations. I went for 70 mile backpacking trips in Virginia, or climbing at the Army Rangers' training facility at Mount Yonah, or whitewater canoing, or on a mountain biking trip. These stories were always popular and all my friends wanted to do stuff like that. My scouts currently are planning a scuba trip at Sea Base for this summer, I'm sure they'll talk with their friends about that and it will be the height of "coolness". So why, if so many Boy Scout activities are at the pinnacle of teen fashion, is it so dorky to be a Boy Scout?
In the early days of Scouting Norman Rockwell frequently painted pictures for the media of Scouts out doing cool stuff, in uniform. "Green Bar" Bill Hillcourt wrote:
Your uniform is part of the thrill of being a Scout. Put on your uniform and immediately you feel ready for hiking or camping, or any of the other vigorous Scouting activities.... And finally, the color and design...make the uniform the clothing of the outdoorsman. The khaki color blends with the hues of the forest, making you almost invisible.... The design is made for comfort, for great freedom of action, and for health. 
The uniform is unfortunately no longer the clothing of the outdoorsman. Scouts no longer associate the uniform with being outdoors, they associate it with classroom like indoor meetings and they want nothing of it. People outside of Scouting associate Scouts with the uniform. When they see modern pictures of Scouts in uniform, they see them collecting at meeting places for classroom sessions and they reasonably decide that Scouts is some sort of etiquette club for boys and not for them.
Boys want something dangerous. They're out to prove what they're made of.
If we want Boy Scouts to be come "cool" again, and we should, we should
promote Scouts the way Rockwell and Hillcourt did. Get pictures out in the
media of Venturers climbing Half Dome in uniform. Get coverage of a troop
doing the Bike Ride Across Georgia, in uniform. Have patrol visits to
mountain bike hangouts to run trails, in uniform. Let your scouts show what
they're made of to their peers, in uniform.