Child seat - don't understand why airbags are bad...

[Daylorb]

Looking into the whole airbag deactivation/child seat kit for my fresh RS60. Did some research into airbags and why they should be turned off in the first place and I'm now getting skeptical on whether or not to turn them off at a..

up - front - I'm talking about using for a 5yr old 45lb 48" child, not a rear-facing infant...

From what I can tell, the argument to turn off the airbags is that a child sitting in a child seat is closer to the airbag than they normally would be and the force of the deployment can cause injury. This due to the seat itself having a back that forces the child closer. If this is the argument - then a backless seat, or booster alone, which keeps the child back farther should negate this problem. This was first studied and concluded in the late 90's on first-gen airbags.

For the most part, child seats with backs do two things - they position the seatbelt properly, and the more bulky units provide some additional lateral support. As for positioning - this advantage really is not all that important once the kid is the right size. It is further negated in the Boxster due to the belt positioners on the seats which do a great job of positioning it about where it should be.

The other advantage of lateral support with the Porsche seat (using the back) is also somewhat non-existent - the Porsche child seat back is pretty flat. Furthermore, the seats in the Boxster actually have very good lateral support already and are relatively cupped - I think sitting in the child seat probably has less lateral support.

So both reasons to use the back of the seat instead of just using a booster don't seem to add a whole lot. Add this to the fact that with the back - the child is positioned too far forward and the airbag needs to be disabled. Add to the fact that airbags have come a long way, along with the combined belt tensioning systems

So maybe I'm missing something here, but wouldn't it be safest to use a booster only and leave the airbag activated? The NHSTA even says this now:

If a child over a year old must ride in the front seat with a passenger-side airbag, put the child in a front-facing child-safety seat, a booster seat or a properly fitted seat belt and move the seat as far back as possible.

Another set of stats:

As of October 1999, about 84 children have died as a result of serious fatal head or neck injuries caused by air bags, but most of the children were unrestrained or improperly restrained, which allowed them to move on top of, or extremely close to their air bags as they began to inflate (e.g., some had slipped the shoulder strap behind them). In addition, NHTSA reports that child air bag deaths declined 96 percent between the years 1996-2001. In 1996, 26 children were killed by air bags; in 2000 9 child deaths were due to air bags.

Also - airbag on/off switches are not even allowed after 2012 model years!

The CA DMV site says this:

Most people can take steps to eliminate or reduce air bag risk without turning off air bags. The biggest risk is being too close to the air bag. An air bag needs about 10 inches of space to inflate. Ride at least 10 inches (measured from the center of the steering wheel to your breastbone) from the air bag cover, if you can do this while maintaining full control of the vehicle. If you cannot safely sit 10 inches away from the air bag, contact your vehicle dealer or manufacturer for advice about additional ways of moving back from your air bag.

So....

If I have a properly restrained child - who wouldn't????

Who is sitting only in a booster with no back - as far back from airbag as possible... seat all the way back

With the seatbelt positioned properly - which it is....

In a seat with good lateral support and a self-tightening belt....

Seems like turning the airbag off is a gigantic waste of time, and there is as big a risk in forgetting to turn it back on? Am I just being crazy here?