1
Introduction
Correction of criminals is an important aspect of ensuring public safety. Ideally correction
system should be designed to turn criminals to a right path. However, in reality it is not
always true. If a criminal enters a correctional facility there is a great possibility that his or
her “criminal trait” will only develop. This is because of specific subculture of correctional
facilities, especially jails. This subculture is largely associated with criminal world. It is not a
secret that there are gangs in prisons as well as gangs on the streets. This paper is an attempt
to outline the main issues connected with prisons gangs: gang recruitment, gang profiles,
reasons for joining a prison gang, racial tension between gangs and its consequences, the
prison employees’ corruption and its impact on gangs, and finally the infrastructure of
American prisons.
Gang recruitment
Prison is a fertile ground for gang recruitment. According, to the 2004 Prison Gang
Survey, the vast majority of correctional institution officers revealed that inmates joining or
being recruited into a gang while incarcerated (Knox). The statistics of inmates who first
joined gang while incarcerated impresses: one out of ten male prison inmates in America first
joined a gang while they were in prison. To certain extent it means that the correction of
inmates has a considerable fail rate since many inmates establish firm links to criminality
through gangs to which they became members due to their incarceration. The gang
recruitment can be of voluntary or coercive character. In other words, some gang members
enlist voluntarily as a matter of personal belief, while others are coerced by fellow inmates to
join a specific gang (Newton 55-64). Sometimes behind coercive recruitments stands an
2
aspiration to have among members a person with special skills (legal training, computer
skills) (Newton 55-64). At the same time, coercive recruitment also takes place when a gang
simply wishes to increase its mass membership (Newton 55-64).
The methods of gang recruitment may vary from gang to gang. For instance, so called
Texas Syndicate gang set certain requirements to the prospective gang members. Thus, this
gang recruited inmates which were known by one of the active members as a childhood
friend (Fong 36-43). Furthermore, there was a preliminary screening of the candidate: a gang
unit chairman investigated candidate’s background through communicating other unit
chairmen and their members who might have knowledge of a candidate (Fong 36-43). If the
candidate had no any suspicious background (eg. served as a police informant or
demonstrated his loyalty to law enforcement in any other way), his admittance was conducted
through vote (Fong 36-43). The vote should be unanimous (Fong 36-43). Some gangs may
have special units responsible for recruitment of inmates. For example, in La Nuestra Familia
gang, there was Education Department that functioned through an extensive secret
bureaucracy within prisons and resembled the correction department bureaucracy itself
(Cummins). Ethnical background may also matter when it comes to becoming a gang
member. California’s first prison gang La Eme (the Mexican Mafia) composed mainly of
Chicanos, or Mexican Americans (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). In order to become La Eme
member one needs the references from sponsoring member of La Eme. Each La Eme recruit
should undergo a blood oath in order to demonstrate his loyalty (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9).
The Aryan Brotherhood, which started in California’s San Quentin Prison, consists of only
white man (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). The very reason for the formation of the Brotherhood
was to oppose the racial threat of black and Hispanic inmates (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). In
order to join the Aryan Brotherhood one must undergo 6-months probation term (Fleisher and
Decker, 1-9).
3
Gang Profiles
As a rule prison gangs share organizational similarities. Prisons gangs are headed by a
leader who supervises a council of members who take the gang’s final decisions (Fleisher and
Decker, 1-9). For instance, the Texas Syndicate is headed by a president and a vice-president
who are elected by entire membership (Fong 36-43). On the unit level the Texas Syndicate is
controlled by a chairman who supervises the vice-chairman, captain, lieutenant, sergeant of
arms, and soldiers (Fong 36-43). Similarly La Eme (The Mexican Mafia) is composed of a
president, vice-president, regional generals, lieutenants, sergeants, and soldiers (Fong 36-43).
One may observe that gangs have quite a strict hierarchy. There are five major prisons gangs
in US: already mentioned Texas Syndicate, La Eme, La Nuestra Famila, the Aryan
Brotherhood, and Black Guerrilla Family (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). La Eme criminal
activities include drug trafficking and conflict with other gangs, such as the Texas Syndicate,
Mexikanemi, and the Aryan Brotherhood. The Aryan Brotherhood is characterized by an
exquisite violence, it is even known as a “mad dog” of the Texas correctional system. Thus,
in 1984 the Brotherhood committed eight homicides in the Texas correctional system, and
this is 32 percent of inmate homicides (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). As well as La Eme, the
Aryan Brotherhood is engaged in drug trafficking (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). The Black
Guerrilla Family emerged in San Quentin in 1966 and consists of black inmates. Back to
those times the Black Guerrilla Family leaned on Marxist-Leninist philosophy and was
considered to be one of the most politically charged revolutionary gangs (Fleisher and
Decker, 1-9). La Nuestra Familia gang originates from California’s Soledad Prison. La
Nuestra Familia fights over drug trafficking with the Mexican Mafia (Fleisher and Decker, 19). The Texas Syndicate emerged in order to oppose harassment against Texans in prisons
4
(Fleisher and Decker, 1-9). The Syndicate consists of Texan Mexican Americans, Latin
Americans, and perhaps Guamese (Fleisher and Decker, 1-9).
Reasons why prisoners join gangs
Inmates may engage in gangs for various reasons. However, the fear factor is a leading
cause why inmates join a gang. For example, inmates not affiliated with gangs may support
gang in order to gain protection (Marchese 44-47). If an inmate seeks to protect himself in
such a way, it means that does not believe that a facility staff can provide them with proper
protection (Marchese 44-47). Gangs indeed offer physical protection for their members.
Thus, La Nuestra Familia gang offers such a protection to its members (Cummins). Apart
from physical protection, gangs also may offer a high status within the prison and afterwards,
a sense of cultural pride, and even economic security for prisoners and their families
(Cummins). Therefore, the motives behind joining a prison gang can be the human need to
seek acceptance, increased status, and financial profit from gang activities.
Many prisoners become gang members on the ground of political, racial or
neighborhood solidarity for protection (Sieh 1-30). Thus, prisoners join neo-Nazi hate groups
because they share similar values (Sieh 1-30). Also prisoners join racial or ethnically specific
gangs to obtain benefits the gang may offer (Sieh 1-30). In addition, prisoners may join the
gangs which tie them to their neighborhood (Sieh 1-30). For instance, the Texas Syndicate
ties inmates from Texas to their neighborhood, which is Texas.
Organized Crime behind bars
5
As it has been mentioned earlier, prison gangs as well any other gangs are engaged in
criminal activity. The fact that gang functions within a prison of course impacts the gang
activity. Thus, communication is an important aspect of gang activity. However, in
correctional facilities with a quite a strict regime, for gang members it can be challenging to
establish an effective communication. The question arises how gang members manage to
communicate in the condition of a strict control. Gang investigators reveal that gang leaders
communicate orders through letters (Danitz 34-37). In order to disguise the content of such
letters (because mail can be monitored) gang members may use special codes – for example,
to make every 12th words of a seemingly innocent letter significant (Danitz 34-37). Some
Hispanic gangs use the Aztec language to code their documents (Allender, and Marcell 8-12).
Furthermore, gang leaders communicate with their outside colleagues. Such communication
is conducted through visits (Danitz 34-37). During the visits significant messages can be put
into their inmates’ artwork. In some states gang members use a telephone for communication
(Danitz 34-37).
Prison gangs as well as street gangs are the form of organized crime. On the streets
gang are engaged in criminal activities in order to earn money. In prison case money are rare.
Instead of money other commodities such as privileges, drugs, commissary items, cigarettes,
clothing and personal services (sex, tattoos, laundry) are used (Holmes, Tewsbury, and
Higgins 111-125). In other words, in prison actual products and services are bought, sold and
traded usually without cash money (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125). However
sometimes cash money are used in prison transactions. Thus, cash can be used when an
inmate has a person outside a prison, who may send money to another person to whom an
inmate is indebted (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125). Also some gangs in prison are
parts of street gangs and thus, share the same criminal activity.
6
Prison gangs often specialize in economic victimization. Economic victimization occurs
when gang members force all independent operators out of business and divide inmate
contraband among themselves. Economic victimization is also reflected in fights for rights to
establish a monopoly within a prison.
The most widespread criminal activity in which prison gangs are engaged is contraband.
Contraband is any unauthorized substance or material possessed by inmates such as weapons,
drug, alcoholic beverages, prohibited appliances, and clothing (Siegel and Bartollas 185-186).
Some prison gangs control the market for contraband, including drugs, alcohol, weapon, cell
phones, cigarettes, and other goods (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125). The research
suggests that prison gangs control 88 percent of drugs contraband, 45 percent for illicit sex,
56 percent for food contraband, 40 percent for contraband/extra clothing, 60 percent for loans
among inmates, and 73 percent for gambling (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125). The
reason for such popularity of contraband is that inmates wish contraband. Indeed, drugs and
alcohol substitutes can ease the pain of imprisonment. There are several ways of how
contraband penetrates into a prison system. First, contraband can be brought in by visitors
(Siegel and Bartollas 185-186). Second, contraband can be introduced by corrupt prison staff,
which can generate profit my selling it to inmates (Siegel and Bartollas 185-186). Indeed,
occasionally prison personnel get caught up in the contraband trade and smuggle items into
prison for inmates. For instance, it is reported that an officer at a prison in the Midwest
regularly stopped for breakfast at a restaurant owned by the mother of one of the inmates
(McShane and Williams 184-185). The officer picked up a cache of cocaine and delivered it
to the inmate (McShane and Williams 184-185). The inmate in his turn sold this cocaine to
other inmates in the contraband marketplace (McShane and Williams 184-185). Third,
contraband goods can be manufactured within prison. For example, weapons can be
manufactured in prison machine shops or factories from metal products or tools (McShane
7
and Williams 184-185). Also inmates may turn harmless into weapons (McShane and
Williams 184-185).
Among other illegal activities conducted in prison are extortion and offering of a
“protection”. Thus, it is believed that gangs control the extortion activities in 70 percent of
prisons (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125). Furthermore, in 76 percent of American
prisons gang inmates involved in offering “protection” to inmates in exchange for goods,
services, and payments (Holmes, Tewsbury, and Higgins 111-125).
Racism and Gangs
As it has been mentioned earlier in this paper one of the reason of joining to prison
gangs is racial solidarity. Indeed, the examination of gang profiles earlier presented in this
paper demonstrates that often members of a particular gang share the same race. At the same
time gangs are characterized by their predisposition to racial intolerance (Tischler 76-79).
Many gangs embrace racism as a principle of their membership (Tischler 76-79). The racial
intolerance espoused by prison gangs obviously leads to violence and escalation of hate
crimes within prisons. Thus, one of the most notorious cases of hate crimes committed in
prisons is murder of James Byrd Jr. in Jasper, Texas. James Byrd Jr. was an AfricanAmerican inmate who was killed by members of white supremacist gang (Tischler 76-79).
One of the murderers was William King who prior entering the prison had no known history
as a bigot (Tischler 76-79). James Byrd Jr. was killed for no apparent reason other than the
colour of his skin (Tischler 76-79). This case clearly shows the treat of turning inmates with
no previous history of racial extremism into bigots while being in prison. Therefore, it is
reasonable to suggest that the prison is a fertile ground for racism. Indeed, the experts suggest
that “the prison subculture is such that there’s almost this need to join up in racial groups”
8
(Tischler 76-79). It is revealed that the race almost always becomes an issue when new
inmate enters a prison. Thus, Frank Meeink, a skinhead who served a year in Shawnee
Correctional Center in Illinois states that in prison “the colour of your skin is a huge part of
where you’re gonna sit or where you’re gonna work out” (Tischler 76-79). When Meeink
arrived in prison he was already known there for his racist beliefs (Tischler 76-79). For this
reason he was immediately put in charge of a chapter of the Aryan Brotherhood, a white gang
(Tischler 76-79). Thus, one may observe that racist views are supported by gangs. Another
aspect reflection of violence generated by racial intolerance is prison race riots. For instance,
in 2003 California’s Pelican Bay State Prison placed two of its units under a full lockdown
after allegedly race-motivated riot which involved approximately 300 prisoners (Spiegel
2261- 2294). In the process of suppressing violence, prison guards shot seventeen prisoners
of which one has been killed (Spiegel 2261- 2294 ). Then in 2006 violence broke up at the
Pitchess Detention Center in Los Angeles County: Latino gang affiliated prisoners attacked
African-Americans (Spiegel 2261- 2294). In result of this riot dozens of inmates were injured
and two were killed. It is important to note that in some cases prison personnel provokes
racially motivated violence. Thus, during the 1990s inmates reported that prison guards at
California’s Corcoran State Prison released known rivals into the prison yard at the same time
and allowed them to fight with each other (Spiegel 2261- 2294 ). When violence broke up the
guards would start a fire often killing inmates (Spiegel 2261- 2294). Furthermore, it is
reported that at Calipatria State Prison guards set up fights between rival gang members,
joking about prospect violence and then using tear gas at combatants (Spiegel 2261- 2294 ).
The threat of racial violence in prison gives a reason to correctional facilities to conduct
a policy of racial segregation. The legality of such policies is often challenged. For instance
in Washington v. Lee (1966 and 1968) the Supreme Court struck down an Alabama prison
policy of racial segregation (Ross, and Hawkins 192-194). However, in 2005 Johnson v
9
California the Supreme Court held that the case should be considered under strict scrutiny
test (Spiegel 2261- 2294), and thus, left a room justification of racial segregation policy in
prison. In particular, one of the judges noted that preserving prison security was a compelling
state interest that may justify racial classification (Spiegel 2261- 2294).
Employee Corruption in Prison
Nowadays prison and jail operations become more complex. Increasing complexity can
create opportunities for corruption. Prison and jail corruption can be reflected in an abuse of
power, oppression or the use of extralegal methods to suppress the will of others, abuse of
authority for personal gain (Carlson and Garrett 267-268). It is acknowledged that corruption
among correctional workers takes place at all levels and in many different forms (Carlson and
Garrett 267-268). Prison corruption falls into three main categories of acts: misfeasance
(deviant acts that an official is supposed to know how to do legally, but are willingly
committed illegally for personal gain), malfeasance (criminal acts or misconduct committed
by institution officials in violation of the criminal laws or agency regulations), and
nonfeasance (failure to act in accordance with one’s administrative responsibilities) (Carlson
and Garrett 267-268). In the context of this paper, that acts that constitute malfeasance are
the most relevant ones. Thus, violation of criminal laws and agency regulations by
correctional officers contributes to the flourishing of prison gangs. Thus, it is a corrupted
personnel that enables communication between gang members. In particular, inmates use a
corruption factor to get cell phones in prisons (Knox). Also corrupted guards are engaged in
drug trafficking. One of the inmates describe that “[d]ealing in drugs was wrong, “if” they
[guards] were not profiting themselves for sales” (Delgado 63-244). Furthermore the inmate
reveals that “[e]very guard was susceptible to corruption, once weakness was discovered”
10
(Delgado 63-244). Thus, one may observe that gang members actually make some efforts to
corrupt correction personnel. The same inmate notes that some guards wished a share of the
drugs, while others wanted money. “The guards quickly learned that being on good terms
with the gang, had its benefits” (Delgado 63-244) – says the inmate. He further describes that
guards even fought among themselves over the Texas Syndicate “like if it was a woman”
(Delgado 63-244). Thus, one of the guards tried to raise suspicions among gang members
against other guards. Corrupted officers also may get a weapon for inmates. “The corrupting
influence of living with criminals had even corrupted the sergeant that policed over us! He
bought me a five-shot .38 revolver!” (Delgado 63-244) – reveals one of the inmates. The
gang members corrupted not only guards but also medical personnel in correction facilities.
One of the inmates reveals that bribes were paid to “convict medics” to ensure that “the
client” receives speedier and better healthcare (Delgado 63-244). Those who could not pay
waited for hours and days in order to receive medical treatment (Delgado 63-244). Inmates
also paid to medical personnel to get pain killers (Delgado 63-244).
State of American Prisons
Current American jails are characterized by large prison population. Thus, local
correctional facilities house over 2.3 million persons on a daily basis (Carlson and Garrett 19159). Between 10 and 15 million persons pass through jail systems during a calendar year
(Carlson and Garrett 19-159). Growing jail population leads to the problem of extreme lack
of space in American prisons. As the result of insufficient jail space thousand of
misdemeanant bookings do not occur (Carlson and Garrett 19-159). Apart from lack of space,
jail facilities often do not have a staff devoted for education and training, and have extremely
limited recreational facilities. Also most of jails are not prepared to house long-term inmates
11
(Carlson and Garrett 19-159). County jail budgets often are not able to cover the cost of
housing of state and federal inmates (Carlson and Garrett 19-159).
Jail systems are one of the largest consumers of health care services in the country
(Carlson and Garrett 19-159). People in jail have a lot of health problems some of which
were not present in past. Health care issue in prisons include HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, sexually
transmitted diseases, tuberculosis, heart diseases, women’s issues, disorders relating to aging,
alcoholism and substance abuse (Carlson and Garrett 19-159). At the same time it is reported
that people in jail do not receive an adequate medical care (Carlson and Garrett 19-159).
Food service facilities and equipment vary from prison to prison. Some correctional
facilities have modern equipment, while others have outdated one. Interestingly that in some
remote local jails it is still a spouse of live-in sheriff who cooks for inmates in the same
kitchen in which she prepares meals for family (Carlson and Garrett 19-159). However, in
most cases the food services is delivered to inmates through cafeteria system, where inmates
get their meals three times a day (Carlson and Garrett 19-159). At the same time, there are
jail facilities which do not have cafeterias, and the meal is prepared in the kitchen and
delivered to the housing units on plastic insulated trays (Carlson and Garrett 19-159). There
are certain requirements for menu. All menus are planned according to dietary allowances of
the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, which is national
authority that recommends a balance of specific food groups (Carlson and Garrett 19-159).
Conclusion
Prison gangs represent a great challenge to the public safety, criminal justice and correction
systems. The existence of gangs within prisons makes it is very challenging for correction
system to reach its goal. In simple terms, the goal of correction system is to put inmates to a
12
right direction so they become socially safe. However, it is almost impossible with gangs in
prison. Gangs are engaged in criminal activity. Therefore, if an inmate is a member of the
gang, there is a little possibility for making him or her socially safe person. The statistics
shows that every tenth man joins a prison gang. It means that penetration into correction
facility actually increases the threat of crime because a gang member will commit a crime
again. In other words, correctional facility does not fulfil its basic purpose: it does not correct,
but makes it worse. The main reason why inmates join gangs is the aspiration for physical
safety. In other words, inmates feel that there is no other way to be protected from
harassment. It shows the low efficiency of prison guards: inmates do not believe that guards
are able to protect them. Prison gangs are often formed on racial or ethnical basis. Racism is a
common phenomenon when it comes to prison gangs. The racial tension among gangs leads
to hate crimes and race riots. In other words racism and violence walk together. One of the
factors that contribute to the “gang problem” in prisons is corruption of personnel. A
corrupted personnel enables communication between gang members by supplying such
devices as cell phones, for example. In addition corrupted staff directly takes part in gang
criminal activity by conducting drag, alcohol, and other goods contraband. Current state of
American prisons is far from satisfactory. The main problem is the lack of space. This is due
increasing inmate population. The prison infrastructure is simply unable to keep up with such
dynamics. Among other problems: lack of training staff, lack of recreational facilities, and
lack of sufficient medical treatment.
13
Works Cited:
Allender, D.M., and F Marcell. "Career Criminals, Security Threat Groups, and Prison
Gangs: an Interrelated Threat." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. June 2003: 8-12. Print.
Carlson, P. M., and J. S. Garrett. Prison and jail administration, practice and theory. Second.
Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2008. 267-268.
Cummins, E. "California Prison Gang Project. Final Report." Education Resources
Information Center (ERIC). Spencer Foundation, Chicago, Ill, 1995. Web. 29 Feb 2012.
<http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED387616.pdf>.
Danitz, T. "The Gangs Behind Bars." Insight on the News. 28 September 1998: 34-37. Print.
Delgado, B. Gangs, prisons, parole $ the politics behind them . Xulon Press, 2007. 63-244.
Fleisher, Mark S., and Scott H. Decker. "An Overview Of The Challenge Of Prison Gangs."
Corrections Management Quarterly 5.1 (2001): 1-9
Fong, R.S. "Organizational Structure of Prison Gangs: A Texas Case Study." Fed. Probation
. 54.1 (1990): 36-43. Print.
Holmes, R. M., R. Tewsbury, and G. Higgins. Introduction to gangs in America. 1. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2011. 111-125.
Knox, G.W.. "The Problem of Gangs and Security Threat Groups (STG’s) in American
Prisons Today: Recent Research Findings From the 2004 Prison Gang Survey ." UMass
Lowell website . National Gang Crime Research Center, 2005. Web. 1 Mar 2012.
<http://faculty.uml.edu/jbyrne/44.327/The Problem of Gangs and Security Threat
Groups.doc>.
Marchese, J.J. "Managing Gangs in a Correctional Facility: What Wardens and
Superintendents Need to Know." Corrections Today. February 2009: 44-47. Print.
McShane, M. D., and F. P. Williams. Encyclopaedia Of American Prisons. 1748. Taylor &
Francis, 1996. 184-185.
14
Newton, M. Gangs and Gang Crime. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2008. 55-64. Print.
Ross , L.E., and D.F Hawkins. "Legal and Historical Views on Racial Biases in Prison."
Corrections Today. April 1995: 192-194. Print.
Siegel, L. J., and Clemens B. Corrections Today. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2010.
185-186.
Sieh, E. W. Community corrections and human dignity. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett
Learning, 2006. 1-30.
Spiegel, S. "Prison Race Rights: An Easy Case for Segregation." California Law Review.
95.6 (2004): 2261 - 2294 . Print.
Tischler, E. "Can Tolerance be Taught?" Corrections Today . August 1999: 76-79. Print.