Ever since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, security in airports has been heightened around the world. Increased surveillance, more metal detectors, and restrictions on certain items have become norm for the past couple of years. But with a more recent slew of attempted terrorist attacks, airport security has been heightened to a degree that many call extreme and invasive.

The newest security measures from the Transportation and Security Administration (TSA) to hit the scene, full-body scanners, have been making quite a stir in the United States. Many deem the instruments, which use millimeter waves or x-rays to see through a person’s clothes to the skin beneath, embarrassing and an invasion of privacy. People across the country are raising an outcry against the scanners, an outcry which the popular media has subsequently latched onto, immediately publishing any and all antics involving the scanners.

Marguerite Daw, a CHS junior, traveled to Washington, D.C. over the winter break. She went through both a pat-down procedure and a full-body scan.

“At Lambert, I just went through the regular metal detector, but then they slightly patted me down, in the front and in the back,” Daw said. “But that might have been because I didn’t take off my sweatshirt. When coming back, at the Baltimore airport, I did have to go through the new screening. You basically just step in there with your hands up, the door turns, and then you went out, and that was it.”

A similar experience was reported by junior Katie Lefton, who, although she did not have to go through the procedure herself, witnessed her father participate in a full-body scan.

“We were coming home from the Denver airport, and there was a long line of a band in front of us, so they had all of these boxes,” Lefton said. “I think they were trying to be a little extra careful, but they made my dad go through the scanner. He said it wasn’t really a big deal, but when I was behind him, I thought that I might have to go through it too.”

This procedure, which countless individuals have undergone since its implementation in most national airports, has garnered reactions from both sides of the spectrum. Frequent fliers, such as Daw, see it as simply another security measure, one to be gotten through quickly and without fuss.

“I fly so often that it’s just second nature for me to just go through it all,” Daw said. “I don’t really feel all that violated.”

Others on the opposite side of the argument find the procedure to uncomfortable and invasive, something that was definitely not warranted.

“I trust that it’s more thorough than a regular metal detector, but I found it to be an invasion of privacy,” Lefton said. “Unless they have a legitimate reason for thinking that I’m a terrorist, I don’t really want to be subject to what is essentially an x-ray through your clothing.”

Strong passions surrounding the debate have also resulted in some unique and highly publicized stunts. In mid-November, John Tyner, a passenger set to be flying out of San Diego, refused a full-body scan, which automatically opts one for a complete pat-down. He balked at this method as well, filming a video on his iPhone where he told the TSA official “Don’t touch my junk.” Since the incident, this video has been posted on YouTube, where it has been watched over 300,000 times.

In another incident in Oklahoma City, wheelchair-bound Tammy Banovac was searched for an hour, despite having worn nothing under her trench coat but black lingerie. The resulting delay caused her to miss her flight, drawing more attention to the debate swirling around the procedures. Although many agree with the message sent, some also believe that the methods could have been different.

“I don’t think it’s quite necessary,” Lefton said. “It’s kind of eccentric, but they’re just trying to prove a point, which I do agree with. I don’t want somebody grabbing at me in a way that can be construed as sexual harassment. They do it in eccentric and extreme ways that I’m not quite sure I approve of, but I do agree with their message.”

Others not only focus on the new procedures, but whether or not they are needed at all. Many people feel that the security utilized before was just as effective, and certainly less extreme.

“For as long as I can remember, whenever I go to the airport, the little announcement always says that the terrorist alert is at orange, so it’s raised security,” Lefton said. “Since 9/11, there hasn’t really been any huge attack that I can think of that requires so much extra work.”

For many, it comes down to a simple question: how far is one willing to go, either in protest or searches, to get a good flight?

“They are pretty much making a big deal out of it,” Daw said. “It’s just something you have to do.”