Prison Gangs

Disruptive activities in prison by small, affiliated groups of inmates are not a new phenomenon. But the number, type, and nature of these groups has changed dramatically since the early 1960's.  Many of these groups originated in prison in response to geographic, ethnic, racial, and ideological influences and as they grew, they evolved to include both institutional and community components.  In some cases, they emulated the philosophy and structure of groups already present in society.  In the intervening years, gang-related activity has created increasingly severe management problems in the institutional setting, as well as for the law enforcement community in general.

Law enforcement personal began to systematically monitor these group activities in the 1970's-- about the time correctional administrators began to see their disruptive influences.  Working together, their initial attempts were to identify only gangs which had some semblance of formal structure--a constitution, bylaws, mission statement, or some identifiable tenets guiding their activities).  However, with experience, staff began to realize that even less well-organized groups could still pose significant threats to the security and orderly running of an institution.  Many of these smaller groups occupy the fringes of various conceptual and organizational frameworks-- most notable ethnic, religious, or social organizations.  Nevertheless, they have demonstrated that they can constitute a threat to prison security and public safety.

As a result, it became increasingly evident that the term gang  did not fit every type of individual or organization and the concept of security threat groups (STGs) was developed to better describe these other types of inmates.  This term conveys the reality of day-to-day life in prison and the streets-- that even small organized groups of offenders can create serious problems and that there are sound management reasons for monitoring their activities, even if they are not formally organized in a gang structure. 

Throughout the 1960's and 1970's, prison gangs focused primarily on uniting inmates for self protection and the monopolization of illegal prison activities for monetary gain.  They combined the philosophies and practices of street gangs and more traditional organized crime families.  At about the same time, some gang rivalries began to develop, fostering predatory and violent behavior.  As the groups became more formally organized, command and control structures were established to strengthen the ability to carry out group goals.

Most gangs recruit along racial and ethnic lines and while actual membership is limited to males, most groups rely to a certain extent on the cooperation and assistance of wives, girlfriends and other women.  In many cases, actual gang members pose less of a management problem than individuals who are in the process of seeking formal gang membership-- who are referred to in many circles as wannabes.  While in recruit status, these individuals are responsible for a large number of violent acts as they attempt to impress members with their ability to be ruthless and supportive of the groups activities.

Other gangs of a more specifically militant and a political orientation also emerged in prison in the 1960's.  In addition to advocating the overthrow of the government, they also adopted a standard bearera mentality, wherein they viewed themselves as liberators of oppressed people.  While their underlying political beliefs were not a prison management issue, their actual conduct did create serious management problems.

In the 1980's, many gangs also extended their influence beyond the prison environment to include the community, and developed alliances (albeit selective and wary) with each other.  These affiliations were motivated by the desire to divide illegal prison activities, to maximize drug profits, and to avoid violent confrontations which adversely affected each gangs individual power and profit bases.  Groups may still be rivals, but they do business across racial ethnic, political, and geographical boundaries on a regular basis out of financial self interest.  An example of cooperative gang relationships can be found in the Mexican Mafia and the Aryan Brotherhood.

Most gangs have developed enemies. An example of an antagonistic relationship is found in the Mexican Mafia and the La Nuestra Familia.  Importantly, though, the identification of alliances (in one prison or prison system) between various gangs and the STGs does not necessarily mean that these inmates are compatible with a group or gang of the same name in another State or the Federal System.  For example, in Arizona or Texas, an Aryan Brotherhood member is not automatically recognized as a member of the Federal prison system's Aryan Brotherhood organization, and vice versa.  Members of the Mexican Mafia which originated on the West coast, are not necessarily compatible with the Texas Mexican Mafia (Mexikanemi).

To compound these problems, during the late 1980's and into the 1990's, prisons were flooded with an assortment of street gang members, Satanists, Marielito Banditos (a small segment of Cuban immigrants), and white supremacist group members.  Each of these groups presents distinct concerns for prison administrators, but among them, street gangs in particular began to establish themselves as a source of even more serious management problems.  With built-in  alliances and organization from their street gang experiences, a highly territorial nature, ready reliance on violence, and an intricate communications system-- including graffiti, rap and “flashing” of hand signals-- street gang members are extremely difficult to monitor and control in prison.

As a final note, gangs seem to systematically evolve-- just as any adaptive organism does-- forming and reforming new groupings in line with external pressure, opportunities, and available resources.  When a group is strong enough to last several months without reorganization, it often develops a specific leadership structure, along with strong group solidarity and loyalty. Often, during this phase some type of ritual of initiation is adopted.  Many groups also write rules or a constitution. In their most well developed form, groups move into legitimate businesses and may even try to enter the political arena, with illegal monies and influences used to foster their activities,  Traditional organized crime is well into this final phase; biker and white supremacy groups are beginning to enter it.