Theorists, psychologists and researchers have articulated different reasons behind the prisons' being unable to play the active and powerful role of the reform house for prisoners. .
The sociological conflict perspective views state of clash and struggle between haves and haves-not in all societies and cultures of the world (Turner, 1978:160). Being the essential part of society, the same conflict could also be found in prisons, where the strong, powerful and affluent prisoners treat the weak, feeble and poor prisoners to be their slaves. The haves not only force the haves-not to remain at their service, but also increase the intensity of criminal aptitude among them. Sexual exploitation serves as the most heinous crime practiced within the prisons, where the weak prisoners are assaulted, tortured and raped by the influential prisoners as well as the members of prison administration. Such a state of affair multiplies the sense of crime among the prisoners, which intend to carry on committing crimes after their release from prison in order to take revenge of cruelties inflicted upon them by the powerful stratum of society in jails. Somehow, it is not the case in every prison, as some of the prisons strictly discourage the exploitation of the weak at the hands of the powerful, though records endorse the exercising of excessive injustices and crimes on the weak prisoners in jails (Pritikin, 2009:1074-5). .
On the other hand, functionalist attribute the society as a structure, where functioning of its different organs decides the future of the entire structure (Turner, 1978:11-2). Since prison is also an essential part of society, activities of its members, including administration and prisoners, is vital for the proper functioning of the system. Somehow, nature of the relationship between the prisons personnel and criminals is of master and slave, which keeps both the parties in conflict with one another.
