Prison Violence

 

Gang Violence or Routine Prison Misconduct ?

By Carl R. ToersBijns, former deputy warden, ASPC Eyman complex, Florence, AZ

 

 

There appears to be an importation of a new prisoner model or ideology that gang violence inside prisons is merely an extension of antisocial behaviors developed on the streets. Opposing this model are those who deny gang activities are on the rise and that the main contributor of increased prison violence is the new youthful offender that does not respect or adhere to prison regulations like those before.

 

There are many publically / politically influenced commonalities in this way of thinking that justifies the lack of response and vigilance regarding this ever growing problem inside of prisons as it is being identified as an individual problem rather than a group or in this case, a gang problem. Surrendering [unknowingly or through passive direction] the prisons to known gang leaders is a strategy that has failed in the past and is making a comeback in some prison systems.

 

It is becoming clearer as every day passes on that prison population are becoming more violent by the moment. There also appears to be a direct correlation between gangs involved in street activities and prison gangs coordinating high risk gang activities from both ends of the fence line. Thus the model delivered attempts to indicate or reflect that one is the same as the other with the only difference being the razor wire that isolates the two versions of disruptive groups within our society and the prison world.

 

The connection also reveals prior inmate behaviors of those gang members out in the streets. These high risk persons handle predictive violent behaviors on the street as they did when incarcerated and involved in significant gang activities.

 

However, unlike the police officers on the street, there are some prison agencies that have chosen to ignore such threats and allowed these especially at risk [often repeat-offenders] persons rule and run prison yards as a condition to maintain peace and control without or minimal administrative intervention.

 

 

It appears that some prison officials feel that gang membership is a smaller threat to their authority thus considered it to be a smaller risk. Although aware of chronic offending and breaking of institutional rules and regulations, their vigilance and enforcement tactics resemble passive ignorance of such a major impact and receives scaled back controlled responses to avoid upsetting the delicate balance of gang controlled power inside our prisons.

 

On the other hand, other prison officials are actively and aggressively addressing gang influences inside prisons as they agreed that prison gang involvement has the same consequences and characteristics as street gang involvement and contributes negatively to prison violence, misconduct and other social maladjustments.

 

Some of those who accept prison gang mentalities and behaviors as a way of life, have thrown in the towel of surrender and allow individual criminality to exist as each prisoner may contribute to the overall prison environment or structural existence through situational dynamics of what is acceptable conduct inside prison and prison life.

 

They refuse to acknowledge that although an individual may be acting as their own criminal [anti-social] behavior dictates, the fact they are gang connected creates a more powerful force that impacts prison violence disproportionately and heightens the risks of violence and other forms of criminality or misconducts.

 

In the end, prison officials have to decide to what extent prison gang membership impacts their daily operation and how it compares to their daily threats of potential disturbances, harm to staff and other prisoners and the cultural settings of different prison yards throughout the system.

 

It would be most beneficial for prison officials to study the relationship between street gangs and prison gangs rather that ignoring this potent link in order to measure their impact related to gang activity, potential threats to the prison population and prison regulations. Ignoring prison gangs as organized and self-perpetuating groups is foolish. Refusing to address this hierarchy of leadership and their established chain of command is detrimental to establishing security and impacts their direct ability to rule and control prison conduct.

They should actively pursue the growth of gang activity through organized strikes and efforts to control these activities and minimize their power and influence on their respective yards so that the prisons are governed by institutional rules and regulations rather than gang like control [intimidation and fear] and violence connect behaviors resembling anarchist at work inside prisons.

 

In denial of such growing dynamics on their yards, officials refuse to admit or identify that gang members are more likely to commit criminal acts than non gang members inside prisons. They are also permitting gang members to commit major misconduct violations to occur such as murder, rape, assaulting of staff and other use of lethal force inside prisons to carry out their illegal enforcement of gang by rules and taxation programs.

 

Giving up social controls on gang members will release [or unleash] a most unwanted dynamic event that gang activity produces or induces into a prison environment. It is problematic and a most perpetuating condition that send a message that violence is condoned and the perpetrators will not be sought for justice or prosecution and that there will be no retribution for such misconduct or behaviors including homicides.

 

November 24, 2012