Gangs in Prisons - Assignment Example

Gangs in Prisons Literature Review During the past two decades in, there has been an increase in the number of gangs leading to a hasher response by the criminal justice system. Therefore, this has led to incarceration of numerous gang members; in fact, a study conducted in 1999 by prison administrators indicated that twenty four percent of male prisoners and seven percent of female prisoners belong to a certain gang in the prison (Shelden, 2004). However, a similar study that had been conducted in America during 1991, the results indicated that nine percent of male prisoners and three percent of female prisoners belonged to a gang. In this case, there is a percentage change of over the years; for instance, another study was conducted and approximately 47,220 male were gang members in 1999 compared to a similar study in 1993 whereby 43,765 men were identified to be gang members in American prisons (Shelden, Tracy & Brown, 2001). However, some states that have been identified with higher number of gangs in their prison population, for example Illinois, sixty percent of the inmates are members of a gang in prison. Nevertheless, due to these observations the paper focuses on determining the reasons behind existence of prison gangs and the way they exist. Surveys conducted in 1999 by prison administrators indicated that gangs were overall around different prisons in America. Moreover, most of the gangs within the same prison harbor rivalry, which is based on their race. However, it has been proofed imprisonment of gang members has been a short-term solution for violence caused by these gangs in the community. In fact, this can result to long rum increase of cohesion between the member of the gang and increased recruitment of more members (Agedorn, 1990). For example, numerous researchers have indicated that many memberships to the gangs are reinforced by the involvement that is considered the opposite intention of incarceration, though there are people how get the chance join the gangs for their first time while imprisoned. The year 1950 marked the beginning of prison gangs in Washington, and later during 1957 in California (Skarbek, 2012). In fact, later during 1969, prison gangs were introduced in Illinois, and by 1970s the states adjacent California and others bordering Mexico had been influenced into the behavior of formatting these groups (Shelden, 2004). In addition, this behavior was transmitted to other states at the north of Illinois, and by 1980s, there were similar organization that were developing in prison systems among regions such as Kentucky and Missouri. Nevertheless, it was identified the major cause of prison gangs formation was due transfer or incarcerations of gang members in another jurisdiction. Therefore, there were efforts to reproduce these organizations by new inmates in a prison system, thereby giving them a way of identifying themselves before imprisonment. Development of indigenous prison gangs was based on the sense of belonging or for the purpose of protection during the period of confinement. Moreover, these groups are made to facilitate activities such as black markets for illegal commodities such as drugs (Agedorn, 1990). On the other hand, racism has been a substantial factor attributing to development of prison gangs. Nevertheless, protection is a key factor that contributes to formation of prison gangs, whereby individuals are recruited due to the challenge of fighting in order to survive in prison. In fact, there are situation where the new inmates are forced to join the gangs or pay for protection, while others become savants of these gang members (Moore, 1978). For example in Texas, gangs have a tendency of recruiting the fraternities, whereby they target inmates serving short sentences, and in their way they are assured that they will benefit from help from them after they leave the prison. The gang members are expected to adhere to a stringent code of silence, whereby they are committed to their gang life, which is a reflection of their convictions. There are large numbers of men and women who are imprisoned in America, though with an objective to improve the quality of prison life. In this case, the prison administrators have been taking the responsibility of sharing their correctional administrative powers with the community and citizens (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). Nevertheless, prisons are considered public institutions that are financed by funds collected through tax, and things that happen in these institutions are determined by the success of the inmates (Shelden, 2004). On the other hand, there convictions by the citizens that involves consideration of the intelligent opinions concerning management of prisons and programming of inmates. There have been proposals made by recently elected officials citing the need for capital punishment, removal of various recreational facilities in prisons. Moreover, they are seeking to do everything that can make the inmates straighten their lives instead of providing comfort in prisons. These gangs establish structures, which have individuals who are chosen as a leader to overseeing a board of members in the gang who make verdicts. Moreover, these groups have a form of bureaucratic leadership, where there are hierarchical ranks that establish organization that matches their counterparts in the community (Moore, 1978). In addition, there are leaders and hard-core members, whereby fifteen to twenty percent of the members lack stake of leading the gang. Prison gangs possess a doctrine or slogan, which can be signified by signs of the membership and they may have a constitution that predetermines their behaviors, and the members are expected to portray absolute loyalty to other members (Knox, 1999). Nonetheless, the gangs have a violent behavior that is customary; in fact, this behavior is applied in promoting the members upward in the prison gang hierarchy. However, the gang focuses on their business of crime, which involves activities such as drug trafficking, while others create the interest of protecting other members. The prison gang exerts pressure on unaffiliated inmates, whereby some have a problem in adjusting to the new conditions after imprisonment (Moore, 1978). In fact, physical security is considered a substantial to member of the gangs in terms of psychological and material functionality. Moreover, this functions as a basis for communication networks for expedient delivery of contraband commodities. Leaders of gangs in streets become leaders after incarceration, and they charged with responsibilities of guiding gangs’ businesses and making decisions. For example, Curry and Decker (1998), explains that Larry Hoover who was a leader of Gangster Disciplines was identified to be running his gang for years during his imprisonment in Illinois prison. Therefore, there are efforts aimed at applying the penal facilities for determining the gang affiliations for inmates. Prison gangs have a code of secrecy, which provides a basis of establishing power and prestige (Skarbek, 2012). In fact, this is evaluated through their ability to control other inmates throughout specific activities within the institutions. On the other hand, the prison gangs uses money and drugs as a representation of tangible symbols, through their ability to dominate other inmates, while other gangs have ability to offer safety, commodities and other services for members. Therefore, gang’s capabilities are basis of determining gang’s status and prestige; in fact, this leads to reinforcement of their commitment and solidarity (Knox, 1999). Members are recruited to becoming immersed into prison gangster has a carrier, thereby spending insignificant time in less inclinations for other social behaviors. Other characteristics of prison gangs include a good definition of their hierarchical structure. In this case, the recruits are based on the experiences gained during the prison life. For instance, the prison is considered an institution that has members with welfare and police experience of involvement (Shelden, 2004). There are numerous anticipatory socializations in prison, where the prison system have an influence on nearly every inmate. On the other hand, there are realities associated with barrio life and contract that have a continuous and drastic influence on inmates. However, inmates focus on adapting, whereby the inmates perceive adaptation process as a variant to street life (Klein, 1995). The notorious aspect of prison life is associated with these gangs, especially among men’s prisons. For instance, after incarceration the inmates who are not affiliated to any gang have fear due to dangers he or she is subjected to because of existence of these gangs. In fact, some of these new inmates are not concern about their survival than the prospects of being sexually abused or being exploited (Moore, 1978). Nevertheless, the guards have insignificant assistance to protect the new inmates in these prisons. Moreover, the prison administrators ignore rivalry of between gangs by tending to maintain a level of social control. Nonetheless, the new inmates are bound to identify a strategy for coping or dealing with the situation in the prison system. The prison gangs have problems that vary depending on the type of institutions due to the disparities in terms of the prison systems. For instance, a study conducted in 1999 regarding increased level of security leads to increased problems for the gangs (Shelden, 2004). For instance, during this study there were ten percent of minimum-security prisons, which were reported to experience disturbances from the gangs during the year. Prison gangs have been identified to have a significant involvement in drug business and violence in various prisons; in fact, they have an objective of dominating these two activities. Moreover, these gangs have money as their source of motivation and this makes them to achieve a high rank and power structure in prisons (Klein, 1995). On the other hand, they exploit other inmates with inherent weakness, which results from prison overcrowding, and other understaffed prisons with in ability to monitor activates of the inmates. During their business operations, when their profits are at stake, this results is violence and this patters are common in almost all prisons. According to Camp and Camp (1985), prison gangs usually have an aggregate three percent of the total population of the prison, though they cause fifty percent of cases of violence in these prisons. On the other hand, these gangs are confined in a small area and they have a finite number of customers who purchase drugs and other services such as prostitution and gambling. There are different numbers of techniques applied by prison administrators in order to gain control over the gang members in the prison. Some of the recommended approaches include improvement of race relations, implementing stringent policies, elimination of gyms, monitoring of telephone calls mails and offering assistance to the staff through attendance of training conferences (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). On the other hand, some of the approaches used applied by the prison administrators to deal with the problem include transferring gang members, use of informers, segregating the members, isolation of leaders, monitoring of communication among the gang members. Numerous studies that have been recently conducted indicate that problems associated with prison gangs have been escalating over the years. Since the studies conducted in 1999, there have been numerous prison administrators reporting that these problems are increasing. This trend of increase was noted back in 1991, where a survey was conducted and results indicated that twenty-seven percent of these problems have increased; later in 1999, the problems increased up to sixty-three percent (Skarbek, 2012). Nevertheless, there are expectations that the number of gang related problem are bound to increase in the future. Isolation of gang leader is a common strategy for controlling the gangs, whereby the gang leaders are locked down and this eliminates vertical communication within the gang. Consequently, the gang solidarity is broken and this can cause the end of the gang’s operation or functionality. For instance, the gang leaders are isolated from their groups through transfer among the institutions, whereby they are kept circulating among prisons. The other strategy involves reduction of gang members by identifying the inmates through their file, whereby they put a note indicating their involvement in gangs (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). In fact, this note is vital to the prison administrators, in order to classify them by being transferred in a high security facility. However, there are cases of inefficiency, whereby there are unconfirmed activities, which are reported by snitches, and this can lead to inappropriate labeling of inmates as a gang member (Klein, 1995). Therefore, when an inmate is labeled, inmates are controlled through threats of segregation or transfer, though there are no approaches involved for evaluation. There are cases where the correctional agencies have been using databases for tracking members of gangs and their activities. Moreover, this acts as a way of facilitating effective communication between correctional agencies and law enforcement agencies. In fact, this also applied for improvement of data accuracy, whereby it is entered after gathering. There are other digitized photos, which are applied for documenting gang members’ symbols and tattoos in correctional facilities (Knox, 1999). Therefore, through database searches the scars and tattoos can be used as a means of identifying the members. In addition, this increase the speed and capacity of updating the intelligence information, whereby the database is shared as a tool to facilitate prison gang management. In conclusion, this section gathers ideas from different sources in order to develop a substantial review of various literatures on the topic of gangs in prison. Therefore, this section offers a basis for testing the hypothesis by fostering an understanding of the relevant issues regarding gangs in prisons such as their reasons for existence and the way they function in these prisons. In this case, the section has offered an overview of issues regarding the gangs in prisons and their functionality in a way that can facilitate testing of the hypothesis and contribute substantially to the discussion of the research. References Agedorn, J. (1990). Back in the field again: Gang research in the nineties. In C. R. Huff, Gangs in America. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Camp, G. & Camp, C. (1985), Prison Gangs: Their Extent, Nature and Impact on Prisons, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Justice Research Program Curry, G. D., & Decker, S. H. (1998). Confronting gangs: Crime and community. Los Angeles: Roxbury Fleisher, M. & Decker, S. (2001). An Overview of the Challenge of Prison Gangs. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), 1–9. Retrieved from: http://www.d.umn.edu/~jmaahs/Correctional%20Continuum/Online%20Readings/prison%20gangs_decker.pdf Klein, M. (1995). The American street gang. New York: Oxford University Press. Knox, G. W. (1999). National assessment of gangs and security threat groups (STGs) in adult correctional institutions: Results of the 1999 Adult Corrections Surveys. Chicago: National Gang Crime Research Center Moore, J. W. (1978). Homeboys: Gangs, drugs and prisons in the barrio of Los Angeles. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Shelden, R. G., Tracy, S. T. & Brown, W. B. (2001). Youth gangs in American society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Shelden, R. G. (2004). Gangs. Encyclopedia of Prisons & Correctional Facilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE 360-63 Retrieved from: http://www.sagepub.com/hanserintro/study/materials/reference/ref10.2.pdf Skarbek, D. (2012). Prison Gangs, Norms and Organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(1): 702-716. Retrieved from: http://www.davidskarbek.com/uploads/PrisonGangs.pdf Read More