The Challenge Of Prison Gangs - Research Paper Example

Prison Gangs Introduction Prison gang is described as an organization that activity is within the prison, and its primary purpose is perpetuating criminality (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). The organization consists of a selected group of inmates that have an established chain of command and are directed by an established sequence of rules of conduct (Skarbek, 2012). Mostly, prison gangs operate in secrecy and their primary purpose is to coordinate activities by controlling their prison world through intimidation and violence towards those who are not part of the group (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). There is insufficient information on the operation of the prison gangs in prison and how this operation is extended to the street. This means there exist interplay between the prison gangs and the street gangs. Prison gangs are distributed in almost all American prisons both states and federal. These gangs have been in existence, in American prisons, for a long time. They have mutated from a small entity to something monumental with ideals that are philosophical and fundamental. The number of gangs and team members continues to grow in the United States. This has been the case in the last two decades of the 20th century. A study carried out in 1999, in the United States, showed that about 25% were male prisoners while only three percent were women (Shelden, 2004). In addition, some states demonstrate high number of gangs as compared to others. The prison gangs were first reported in the state of Washington in California, in 1957. A decade later, they appeared in other states such as Illinois. Early prison gangs spread through transfers or re-arrests of gang members in another jurisdiction. The inmates in a prison engage in spreading the ideals of the gang in which they enjoyed identity prior to incarceration. In other places, charismatic leaders initiated what they had heard about other gangs. Two main gangs exist within the prison systems. They include street gangs that are brought to jail and the group that originates within the institutions. The major factors for early development are a sense of belonging and protection during times of confinement. The other factors included racketeering, black market for illegal goods and services, and racism. However, protection served as the main aim for the gangs. Mostly, when individuals join prison they are challenged to engage in a fight. Such individuals are forced to join the gang, pay for protection, or servants to other prisoners. For example, in Texas gang recruit like fraternities and often target members who are serving short-term sentences (Shelden, 2004). Through this, they are able to help the group once they are released for the prison. They adhere to a precise strict code of silence, and they follow the gang in the rest of their lives. On the other hand, the gang members on the street experience little difficulty in adjusting to a new environment. The gang in prison and street also serves as emotional functions for their members. They also help in instilling a sense of belonging. Members live, and die for the gang. Many of the gang members in the prisons have previous leadership skills from the organization in the outside. They are the one who makes key decisions as gang business are concerned. For this reasons, many correction facilities try to determine gang affiliation as soon as the sentence begin. When one is established to belong to a certain gang, they are drawn into control, recreation, and housing. In most of the facilities, there is an effort to separate members of the rival groups. In most of the prison gangs, they have a direct counterpart with the state prison system. For example, in Stateville, the convict system is organized in ways almost identical with the gangs on the street of Chicago. Additionally, the gangs adhere to a code of secrecy. They also emphasize power and prestige depending on the ability to control other inmates and activities within the correction facility (Shelden, 2004). Money and drug are the main symbols of gang’s ability to control and influence others. This also shows that they have the strength and skill to provide necessary care, goods and services for its members. The capacity also reinforces the commitment and solidarity with the group. They also have a creed or motto, unique symbols of membership, and a charter outlining their function (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). Violent behavior appears as common attributes and helps individuals to achieve the position in the group. However, there are many more prison gangs in existence today in the United States. Research shows that there are over 100 gangs in the United States. The survey carried out on 49 agencies showed that over 75% of the agencies have had gangs in their system (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). This paper seeks to focus on the security threat groups and the effects that they have had on prison systems. Security-Threat Groups (STG) There are various security threats in the society. The first known American prison gang was the gypsy jokers. This gang was formed in the 1950s in Washington state prisons (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). However, after this group there was the emergence of others group. Among these was the Mexican mafia (La Eme). This group had widespread ties and formed in 1957 in the California departments of corrections (Orlando-Morningstar, 1997). This was the first California prison gang. It was composed mostly of Chicanos, or the Mexican Americans. The joining by the member requires a blood oath to prove loyalty. The group does not prohibit killing its members who become unreliable. The group is well known for drug trafficking, extortion and murder. The mode of connection is by use of number 13 a representation of the thirteen letter of the alphabet. The largest population of this group is in California and Texas. Their sole purpose is to earn money through illegal activities. There are other leading prison gangs in the United States. The first serious prison gang in the United States is Neta. This is a Hispanic gang name formed in the late 70s at Oso Blanco prison. They also spread to the east coast of the United States where they recruited more members. They claim that their membership is meant to Hispanic culture and education. Many of the members claim that they are strictly part of a prisoner right group. However, it has been established that the gang main source of income is retail distribution of powder and crack cocaine, heroin, marijuana, and other unlawful forms of drugs (Dufresne, 2010). The other gang is the black prisoners young. They are predominantly designated as 415 KUMI. They originated in the San Francisco bay area of California, in 1985 (Dufresne, 2010). Kumi is a Swahili word for ten hence the name (Dufresne, 2010). Their main intention is to get the streets on their control by any means possible. They do this in cohorts with the prison gangs. The other gang is the Dead Man Inc. This originated in the Maryland Department of Correction in the late 90s. This is formed on the principles of anti-government and anti-authority. This gang incorporated small gang members and has now become one of the largest gangs on the east coast. They show violence towards other inmates and staff and engage in contract killing for the Black Guerrilla Family (Dufresne, 2010). The other group is the Nazi Low Riders. This is a fast growing gang in the California prison system. They trace their origin to California Youth Authority that existed in the 1970s. They are easily identifiable in the system due to their violence towards staff and other inmates. Their original intention was to make a profit through illegal activities. However, recently they have been associated with racist’s attacks in and outside the prison. The other key gang is the Texas syndicate. This gang origin is in Deuel Vocational Institute, in California’s, in 1958. The group top leadership consists of president and vice president. There is also chairperson, captain, lieutenant, sergeant at arms and even soldiers. The lower ranking members perform the criminal activities of the gang. The gang officials apart from the president and vice president join the soldier once they move to a different jail to avoid conflict of interest. There is voting on decision-making and majority decision determines the group behavior. Inmate members are Texas Mexican Americans. However, the group has diversified its membership and offers membership to Latin Americans. They dislike other Mexican American Gangs especially those from Los Angeles (Dufresne, 2010). This Other prison gang was established in response to harassment. Their main activities include drug trafficking, extortion, prostitution, protection, illegal gambling and contract execution (Dufresne, 2010). The Black Guerilla Family (BGF) is another crucial prison gang. This was founded in the San Quentin Prison, in California. The ideals of this group are antigovernment and anti official. This group shows some political orientation. The group is based on views on Marxism ideals and goals include elimination of racism, preservation of dignity in prison and toppling of the United States government (Dufresne, 2010). The other group is the Aryan Brotherhood. This is a white supremacist group established in the 1967 at San Quentin prison in California by the white inmates. They wanted to resist the racial threat of Black and Hispanic inmates or check organization by the two groups (Orlando-Morningstar, 1997). The joining of the group required killing of someone. Initially, the group used a three-member panel of high-ranking members within the federal prisons. They have over 15, 000 members in and outside the prison. The original ideals were the protection of whites against blacks in the prison; however, later it transformed into a criminal entity. Inside prison, they regulate the sale of drugs, gambling, and male prostitutes. They usually carry out contract killings for the Mexican Mafia. The group is composed of nearly 1% of the prison population nationwide and is responsible for up to 185 that occur in the federal prison system (Dufresne, 2010). The other group is La Nuestra Familia. This was established in the 1960s in California’s Soledad prison. The original members were Hispanic inmates from Northern California’s agricultural valley. They came together to protect themselves form the Los Angeles based Mexican mafia. The group has a formal structure and rules as well as the governing body known as La Mesa (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). This group still wars with the Mexican Mafia over drug trafficking but the war is on the decline in California (Orlando-Morningstar, 1997). The other group is the Mexikaneni established in 1984. This is the largest gang in the Texas prisons. However, it is also spreading to the federal prisons and kills in areas outside their state. The group also has leadership composed of president, vice-president, regional generals, lieutenants, sergeants and soldiers. The rising in power is based on leadership skills demonstrated by individuals. Members retain their position until they are reassigned to a new prison. The group has a 12-part constitution. For example, section five of their rules stipulates that a member is responsible for the person he sponsors into joining the group; the sponsor can only terminate this member if necessary (Orlando-Morningstar, 1997). These are the main prison gangs in the United States. The Effects That They Have Had On Prison Systems The rise of Security-threat groups has had enormous effects on the prison systems. They have an adverse effect on the prisons quality of life. These gangs are involved in various misconducts witnessed in various correction facilities. The level of violence has been increasing in the state prisons for the last one decade. For example, in Ohio the overall rate of guilty brutal act per a thousand inmates had risen to 2011 as compared to 2007 when it was at 156 (Kowalski & Martin, 2010). The more common misbehavior in prisons involves inmate on inmate assaults. The other is increased injury rate to prisons inmates. In fact, this comprises over 80 percent of the incidences in the prison. Most of the inmates with known gang affiliation are involved in assaults, in prison (Kowalski & Martin, 2010). In fact, the preliminary statistics indicate nearly half of the prisoner’s disturbances were traced to have been related to a security threat group affiliation (Kowalski & Martin, 2010). Available evidence also shows that there is a change in the individual gangs involved in these types of violent incidents. In Ohio, it has been established that a local established gang has been responsible for over 10% of the entire STG related inmate on inmate nonsexual assaults (Kowalski & Martin, 2010). This is a double of what was witnessed in 2009. In 2009, the active and disruptive STG were involved in committing a troublesome rule (Kowalski & Martin, 2010). Most of these disruptions are fights and assaults. The STG are also responsible for small forms of violence that exists on prisons. The violence results from various activities that take place in the prison. They include inmate collective action, weapon, gambling, drugs, alcohol and other related behaviors. The violence has also been shown to arise from staff/inmate personal relationship. Moreover, the California state prisons departments have been affected tremendously by the security threat group (STG)/ gangs. They are forced to handle the most violent and sophisticated gang members and associates in the country. Most of the gangs in the states are mostly connected to main criminal activities in communities. These crimes include; homicides, drug trafficking, prostitution, human trafficking and extortion. This has been possible due to the relationship that exists between the minor offenders who join the gangs before being released from the prison once these join the gang; they take their activities outside the prison. This has been a challenge to the California Department of Collections and Rehabilitation. These gangs are also responsible for the activities that take place within the correctional facilities. These activities include trafficking of narcotics, committing or directing violence against staff and offenders (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 2012). They are also involved in directing criminal activities between the correction facilities and the community. The facilities also face the challenge of internal disruption by the criminal gang members. This is through their aggressive nature that they engage in victimizing each other. This is usually challenging to uninvolved offenders and staff. They also engage in the solicitation on personal and economic resources. Additionally, prisons gangs dominate the drug business in the correctional facilities. Through involvement in these activities, they have led to considerable violence in the prison. These activities are motivated by a desire to make money to maintain the gangs. They achieve this using various weaknesses that may occur in the collection facilities. These weaknesses include overcrowding, understaffing of facilities, and problems in maintaining investigation of activities taking place in the prison. Violence usually results when the activities of generating incomes are threatened. Research also shows that gangs are responsible of over 50 percent of the violence that occurs in the prison facilities (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). Most of the violence occurs in the areas where prohibited activities are taking place. This is mostly likely to take place in overcrowded prisons. Turf wars take place in these facilities where gang members and non-gang members find it difficult to retreat to safer areas when a conflict arises (Fleisher & Decker, 2001). This is a challenge to most of the prison staff. The prison gangs have also led to the emergence of contraband market in the correctional facilities. This has led to the proliferation of narcotics behind bars. The market thrives in these facilities due to credible punishments mechanisms in case of defection. This has been due to increased numbers of convicts in states prisons (Skarbek, 2012). They also direct others black market activities within the prison. This is a challenge to the collection facilities. This is because the rise of drug cases is a direct contravention of jail activities that require rehabilitation of individuals suffering from drug abuse. This means in the prison facilities there is greater accessibility of drug as compared to the outside. This is because; through the black market, the gangs are able to provide narcotics at a cheaper price as compared to other places. Moreover, prison facilities have been designated as the notable are where issue of racism can be easily watered down. This one issue is of historical significance in the united state. However, the emergence of security threat group is threatening this approach. This is because these gangs are formed based on which ethnic group one belongs (Paige & Marquart, 1991). This has heightened racial tension in the collection facilities. Most of violence and disruption that takes place in these facilities are due to tension between different cultural and ethnic groups. This is more challenging to prison staffs that have been trained to ensure that there is no racial divide. Strategies That Prison Officials Have Developed To Deal with These Groups Because of violent activities in the correction facilities due to security threat group, correctional institutions have been forced to halt prison violence through intervention programming. This intervention has taken place through various means. There are common approaches the prison officials have adopted. They include segregation, consolidation and bus therapy. The segregation approach involves the separation of the gang members from the general population (HubPages, 2013). The consolidation approaches involve sending hard-core gang members to other prisons (HubPages, 2013). This was encouraging to different states as they witnessed a decrease in assaults, inmate fights and threats and drug violation. This was effective in the state of Arizona. Other facilities have embarked on the creation of creating gang free facilities to accommodate non-affiliated inmates. This prevents the significant presences of gangs. On the other hand, the bus therapy involves moving inmates around various prisons (HubPages, 2013). This moving of inmates around ensures that there is an elimination of a potential problem with the institution. Moreover, the prison authorities have also engaged in rehabilitation programs. This is through a cognitive behavior therapy. Inmates are given an opportunity to examine their life including their violent gang related incidents and change their thought process (HubPages, 2013). The other strategy that the prison officials have adopted is the reduction of overcrowding in prison facilities. The inmates are relocated to less crowded area (Paige & Marquart, 1991). This has helped in reduction of violence significantly especially in the texas prison. The prison officials have also engaged in community based approach (HubPages, 2013). This is because most of the violent cases arise from the community level. Conclusion It is clear that the rate of conviction in America is on the rise in the last one decade. Likewise, this has resulted in the rise of security threat groups in the correction facilities. This has also led to the growth of radical prison gangs. Such prison gangs include Neta, Aryan Brotherhood, Black Guerilla family, Mexican Mafia, Texas Syndicate amongst others. It is also clear that the number of males in correction facilities is also higher as compared to females. Moreover, these gangs in prisons have also engaged in activities that serve as a problem to the collection facilities. These activities include drug trafficking, gambling, prostitution amongst others. These activities have contributed to the rise of violence directed towards other rival gang, staff of the facilities, and even other inmates. This problem is more difficult to the prison staff and officials. This has led to various initiatives being undertaken by the prison officials. Such programs require segregation, rehabilitations, community involvement amongst others. However, the solution of preventing and reducing gang violence appears a daunting task. This is due to various interrelationships that exist in these gangs. Lastly, there should be more funding for prison facilities to be able to exercise their authority. This will help the correction facilities take care of various challenges it has been facing. This in future will help eliminate the problems that exist in the society. References California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). (2012). Security Threat Group Prevention, Identification and Management Strategy. Retrieved from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/reports/docs/security-threat-group-prevention-identification-and-management-model-03-01-2012.pdf Dufresne, D. (2010). Top 10 US Prison Gangs. Retrieved from http://listverse.com/2010/12/11/top-10-us-prison-gangs/ Fleisher, M & Decker, S. (2001). “An Overview of the Challenge of Prison Gangs.” Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), 1–9. HubPages. (2013). Reduction Methods of Prison Gang Violence. Retrieved from http://em87b.hubpages.com/hub/em87b Kowalski, B & Martin, B. (2010). Violence and Security Threat Group Participation in Ohio Prisons. Retrieved from https://www.aca.org/research/pdf/ResearchNotes_October2012.pdf Orlando-Morningstar, D. (1997). “Prison Gangs.” Special Needs Offender Bulletin, 2, 1–13. Paige, R & Marquart, J. (1991). “Gang violence.” The Prison Journal. LXXI, 2, 38-49. Shelden, R. (2004). Gangs. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/hanserintro/study/materials/reference/ref10.2.pdf Skarbek, D. (2012). “Prison Gangs.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(1), 702-716. Read More