Criminal Crews, Codes, and Contexts: Differences and Similarities across the Code of the Street, Convict Code, Street Gangs, and Prison Gangs

ABSTRACT

We use 16 characterizations of crews, codes, and contexts to determine if offender subcultures (code of the street, convict code, street and prison gangs) converge, complement, or are independent of one another. We find extensive overlap across offender subcultures with “belief” subcultures in street and prison settings mirroring the “group” subcultures in those respective settings. Findings generate a call for comparative research on the convergences and divergences across subcultures on the street and in prisons with a specific emphasis on the impact that importation, deprivation, and exportation have on policy and programming importation for both the street and prison settings.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Rick Moule and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions on previous drafts of this article.

Funding

This project was supported by Grant No. 2014-MU-CX-0111 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

Notes

¹ The authors recognize that not all youth adhere to the code of the street and not all inmates adhere to the convict code. Therefore, the review presented below does not assume that the code of the street or convict code is monolithic.

² In 2014, for example, 626,644 individuals entered into incarcerated settings and another 636,346 individuals reentered their communities (Carson 2015). It is estimated that approximately 95% of inmates are eventually released back to their communities (Pridemore 2014), yet of those, the recidivism rate is over 75% within 5 years (Durose et al. 2014).

³ The importation model (Irwin and Cressey 1962) suggests that in-prison behavior is primarily a function of the inmate’s pre-prison character traits and life histories, and is thus imported to the prison with them; the deprivation model (Sykes and Messinger 1960; Sykes 1958) proposes that conduct in prison is largely a ubiquitous effect of the prison environment itself. That is, the pains of imprisonment, lack of liberty, and adversities faced in the prison, which are generated by the structural deprivations inherent in prison life, cause particular behavior patterns. Exportation, for our purpose, can be defined as the theoretical counterpart of importation wherein subcultural norms, beliefs, and actions may return to the streets from the prison.

⁴ We rely on Swidler’s (1986) description of culture, which proposes that cultural identification is developed through iterative formations of skills, habits, and styles ultimately influencing action and behaviors. More specifically, cultures are “symbolic vehicles of meaning, including beliefs, ritual practices, art forms, and ceremonies, as well as informal cultural practices such as language, gossip, stories, and rituals of daily life” (Swidler 1986:273).

⁵ The authors recognize there is an overlap between gang members on the street and in prison (Jacobs 1974; Skarbek 2014; Varano et al. 2011), but for the purpose of this inquiry we organize the research on street or prison gangs as separate entities because we aim to make comparisons between groups.

⁶ See definition in footnote #3.

⁷ Some research has found that the code of the street is not exclusive to males, with some females in urban areas using the code to gain a reputation that is centered on respect, status, and the use of retaliation (Brunson and Stewart 2006; Jones 2008, 2009; Nowacki 2012). Additionally, unlike Anderson (1999), Nowacki (2012) suggests inner-city girls campaign for respect by displaying toughness, similar to the boys.

⁸ A “code of the suburbs” (Jacques and Wright 2015) also exists with similarities and stark differences to the code of the street. For the purpose of this analysis, the suburban code is not included due its recent development and limited empirical evaluations.

⁹ Gang activity may vary by region (Howell et al. 2011), which likely corresponds with variations in gang activity in jails and prisons.

¹⁰ Of course, not all gang behavior is focused around violence, and, in fact, most collective behavior among gang members is nonviolent (Decker and Van Winkle 1996; Horowitz 1987; Hughes and Short 2005; Levitt and Venkatesh 2000; Miller and Brunson 2000; Pattillo-McCoy 1999; Zatz and Portillos 2000).

¹¹ However, it is important to note that not all individuals living in impoverished neighborhoods internalize the code of the street.

Additional information

Funding

This project was supported by Grant No. 2014-MU-CX-0111 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

Notes on contributors

Meghan M. Mitchell

MEGHAN M. MITCHELL is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology at Sam Houston State University. Her research includes the nexus of subculture, offending, and victimization; along with communities and crime; prisoner reentry; and inequalities. She has published in the Journal of Criminal Justice and is a co-author of an edited book chapter in The Handbook of Gangs. The Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Charles Koch foundation are funding her dissertation research, which evaluates the implications of the convict code on prisoner misconduct, victimization, and attitudes related to reentry. Her current role is managing a National Institute of Justice grant that evaluates the importation and exportation of prison gang subcultures longitudinally, with an emphasis on reentry.

Chantal Fahmy

CHANTAL FAHMY is a doctoral student and research assistant in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University. She received her bachelor’s degree in Criminology, Law, and Society from University of California, Irvine and her master’s degree in Criminal Justice from California State University, Long Beach. Her primary research interests include institutional corrections, prisoner reentry and health, and scholarly productivity. Currently, she manages a National Institute of Justice grant assessing the implications of prison and street gang membership for recidivism and reentry.

David C. Pyrooz

DAVID C. PYROOZ is Assistant Professor of Sociology and Faculty Associate of the Institute of Behavioral Science at the University of Colorado Boulder. He received a Ph.D. in Criminology and Criminal Justice from Arizona State University in 2012. His research interests are in the areas of gangs and criminal networks, developmental and life course criminology, and incarceration and reentry. He was the recipient of the 2016 American Society of Criminology Ruth Shonle Cavan Young Scholar Award and the 2015 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences New Scholar Award. His current research examines the relationship between street and prison gangs.

Scott H. Decker

SCOTT H. DECKER is Foundation Professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University. His main research interests are in the areas of gangs, violence, and criminal justice policy. He is a Fellow in both the American Society of Criminology and the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences. He is the author of 17 books and over 120 scientific articles. His books include, Life in the Gang: Family, Friends and Violence (Cambridge, 1996), Confronting Gangs: Crime and Community (Oxford, 2015), and Policing Immigrants: Local Law Enforcement on the Front Lines (University of Chicago, 2016). Decker recently completed a study funded by the National Institute of Justice that examines the role of race/ethnicity, gender, and a prison sentence on employment chances. He is engaged in a study of the use of technology by offenders funded by Google Ideas.