There’s truth to both, airbags were in fact initially concocted as a substitution for seatbelts, because there were generations of drivers and passengers who flat out refused to wear them because they considered them too annoying/constricting(and in many old cars prior to 3 point belts they were). Airbags seen as were a futuristic substitute that would make occupant safety totally passive.
The first generation of cars with airbags largely were still built as a primary safety system(keep in mind their direct predecessor was the auto belts on 89-93 MN12s, these were deemed by regulatory bodies in the 90s as perfectly adequate substitutes in passive safety as airbags) As the science of safety has continued to improve airbags and seatbelts being used in tandem, with more airbags being utilized with the driver being secured in place by the seatbelts to make their aim at the occupants dynamic and predictable.
My personal take is these cars being of the unrefined first generation variety, I don’t put any more faith into their effectiveness over wearing a seatbelt only, I don’t feel more safe in 94-97s with airbags over 89-93s with their silly autobelts. Mainly because I too am a religious seatbelt wearer, but moreover I also sit in/adjust my seat properly with the head restraint actually adjusted like a head restraint. If you’re the type of driver who likes to drive with the backrest reclined way back you’re going to get neck injuries with or without an airbag, or driving with your hand at 12 o clock you’re going to turn your hand/arm into hard projectile aimed right at your face. Safety can always be defeated by improper usage
