Introduction
Gang members within the facilities of correction and their respective communities have proven a vital challenge to security in relation to their criminal activities. In view of this situation, many researchers have studied ways in which these security threat groups can be managed and have deduced a number of findings (Winterdyk, 2010). The following paper critiques on two journals that touch on the management of prison gangs and analyses their methodology in a bid to either agree or disagree with their conclusions.
Managing prison gangs: Results from a survey of U.S. prison systems John Winterdyk a, Rick Ruddel. Journal of Criminal Justice
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The research paper does well to describe the problems posed by the security threat groups in correctional facilities and communities. It provides the problems that these groups face in a detailed manner hence providing the floor for the need to have recuperative measures and management strategies. The detailing is well described and takes a qualitative design that is effective in providing evidence-based information. Furthermore, the paper provides crucial information on the strategies to manage criminal activities by these gangs and offers a reason for why some have failed since they were implemented. The above is crucial because it gives a clear detail and picture of what transpires in the field and what must be improved.
The data methods entailed surveys that were sent to all prisons in the United States both federal and state. The list of persons to contact was drafted by the website of the National Major Gang Task Force. The methods used to collect data was effective to draw information but hardly was it solid to make a conclusion based on the information received. The data could not be completely truthful because it depended on the honest will of the persons who received the emails sent to them. In a bid to make the situation look under control or over control, the respondents could have falsified their responses.
Problem of Gangs and Security Threat Groups (STG's) in American Prisons and Jails Today: Recent Findings from the 2012 NGCRC National Gang/STG Survey. George W. Knox, Ph.D.
The article in its preamble does well to describe what the National Gang Crime Research Centre considers as Gangs and Security Threat Groups. It offers information pertaining to the recruitment of gangs in correctional facilities and prisons and the menace that comes with the same. The document further does proper to touch on the religion, racial conflict and extremism as well as other issues.
The method of collecting data entails surveys that were sent to a number of respondents. The methods of data collection prove vital in gathering information but do not fit to make conclusions because respondents could easily falsify information. Furthermore, the survey response could be vague to interpret by persons that were not present during the time when the respondent was giving their responses to disclose any mishaps or seek follow up clarification on ambiguous answers. Therefore, the conclusions drawn or made rather significantly depend on how the person that receives the responses interprets the information received and how the best describe the picture created in their heads from the feedback they get.
Summary
Managing prison gangs: Results from a survey of U.S. prison systems John Winterdyk a, Rick Ruddel. Journal of Criminal Justice
Survey responses from the prison systems in the US with 1.19 million inmates were collected (Winterdyk, 2010). The results touched on the prevalence of the gang members, structure and strategies used to manage the threat the groups pose.
There is a significant increase in the proportion of members of security threat group over the past five years with the offenders being more sophisticated and disruptive than the ones in the past.
Despite the significant challenges that the security threat groups pose to the correctional system and entire prisons, the US security enforcement agencies have failed to acquire a single strategy that will be effective in suppressing these groups (Winterdyk, 2010). Unfortunately, these systems do not do well to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions of gang management.
The lack of a comprehensive system to rehabilitate gang members presents a major disadvantage in the management strategies of most jurisdictions and the implications are adverse.
Problem of Gangs and Security Threat Groups (STG's) in American Prisons and Jails Today: Recent Findings from the 2012 NGCRC National Gang/STG Survey. George W. Knox, Ph.D.
The surveys complied since the year 1990 insist that gang members in the US are on the constant rise and their numbers are rapidly increasing (Knox, 2004). It is not exaggerated to insist that the gang run the systems of correction in the US courtesy of the connections and sophistication they poses.
The major problem in these facilities is the recruitment of gang members because it allows the continuation of these problems carrying them forth to other generations and spreading the virus.
The most effective strategies to curb these prison gangs are those that entail maintenance of peace apart from the ones that use force in trying to deal with the problem at hand (Knox, 2004).
Conclusion
The two documents provide quantitative and qualitative information in relation to gangs in correctional facilities providing strategies on how to handle the situation. Gang members within the facilities of correction and their respective communities have proven a vital challenge to security in relation to their criminal activities. In view of this situation, many researchers have studied ways in which these security threat groups can be managed and have deduced a number of findings.
References
Knox, G. W. (2004). The Problem of Gangs and Security Threat Groups (STG's) in American Prisons Today: A Special NGCRC Report. Journal of Gang Research.
Winterdyk, J., & Ruddell, R. (2010). Managing prison gangs: Results from a survey of US prison systems. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 730-736.
