Going to give a longish tldr

I have a degree in criminology many years ago which is where I first started advocating for prison reform. I am a full supporter of the death penalty which often contradicts the reform agenda.

I want to get more active in reforming the US Prison system instead of just “talking about it”. However, I want to help reform prisons for 80-90% who deserve better and more humane treatment. I’d rather see that other 10% be isolated/eliminated so society can move on before ANY changes are made. I don’t believe in making changes for those who don’t deserve it.
\mind you this is a VERY condensed TLDR\

So my genuine question is, does anyone know ways to support reform while also wanting to eliminate the worst of the worst? It’s not a debate prison need to change, but I watch documentaries of scum tying up people and extorting them/families and wanting nothing more than to see those doing it eliminated.

I understand the loud minority paradox. Just looking for guidance from those who have found their mindset in similar positions while also genuinely wanting to help the 90%

HDC scheme needs to be brought back — the prison system needs urgent reform
The UK prison system is heading towards a serious capacity problem, and by November 2026 we could be looking at prisons reaching full capacity. Something has to change, and I believe the Home Detention Curfew (HDC) scheme should be strengthened and properly used again for prisoners who meet the relevant risk-assessment criteria.
This isn’t about being “soft on crime”. Anyone who has caused serious harm or a death should still be subject to appropriate punishment and careful risk assessment. But there are also people in prison for less serious offences, people who may have been present when an offence was committed, or people serving sentences where imprisonment may not necessarily be the most effective way of protecting the public.
We also need to ask whether prison is always the best answer for offences such as financial fraud, certain online/social-media offences, and other lower-level crimes. Where there is no significant risk of physical harm, could alternatives such as fines, compensation, restrictions, electronic monitoring, community sentences, or being blacklisted from certain activities or professions be more effective than spending huge amounts of taxpayers’ money keeping someone in prison?
There are also wider concerns about the justice system. A conviction should be based on proper evidence and a fair process, not simply because someone happened to be at the scene or because the system is under pressure. If Crown Court and jury services are struggling because of backlogs and lack of resources, that needs addressing too. People shouldn’t lose their liberty because the system is overstretched.
And then there’s probation. Once someone is released, the system needs to provide consistent supervision and rehabilitation rather than making people feel that probation is inconsistent or dependent on who they happen to be dealing with. If we’re going to release people earlier, there needs to be proper support, monitoring and accountability.
HDC could be part of that solution. If someone has been properly risk-assessed and meets the eligibility requirements, allowing them to serve part of their sentence at home under strict conditions and electronic monitoring could:
Reduce pressure on overcrowded prisons.
Save taxpayers money.
Allow suitable prisoners to maintain employment and family responsibilities.
Give people a structured transition back into society.
Free prison places for offenders who genuinely need to be there.
Reduce the pressure created by an overstretched prison estate.
But HDC alone isn’t enough. The whole system needs reform — sentencing, courts, probation, rehabilitation and alternatives to custody.
We need a justice system that protects victims and the public, but also makes sure imprisonment is being used where it is genuinely necessary and proportionate.
If someone is assessed as low-risk and eligible for HDC, why keep them in an overcrowded prison at huge cost to the taxpayer when they could be safely managed in the community?
What do people think — should HDC be expanded as part of a wider prison and probation reform, rather than waiting until prisons reach crisis point?

Deonta David and Dmante Anderson are serving decades in prison for crimes they didn't commit. One was convicted by an 11-member jury (illegal under Georgia law). The other's wife says she shot herself, not him. Both are Muslim men who represented themselves. Both cases involved prosecutors breaking rules, judges with clear bias, and nobody held accountable.
I started a petition demanding the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles review their cases immediately, and that prosecutors and judges face real consequences for the misconduct in these files. Prosecutorial Brady violations, deliberately withheld evidence, judges making inflammatory social media posts about Muslims—this isn't justice. This is a machine that eats innocent people.
If the system can do this to them, it can happen to any of us. What would you want someone to do if this was your family sitting in a cell for something they didn't do? If this matters to you too, consider signing and sharing—these men need voices outside the system fighting for them.

Deonta David and Dmante Anderson are serving decades in Georgia prisons for crimes they didn't commit—and the corruption that put them there is staggering.
Deonta got life plus 85 years after being convicted by an 11-member jury (a structural defect requiring reversal under Georgia law). His judge, Stacey Hydrick, dismissed the court reporter before a hearing, denied him the right to Islamic prayer, and had posted online that there are "no innocent civilians in Gaza." The prosecution withheld a witness's felony record and introduced evidence without proper chain of custody. Deonta is now targeted for violence in prison because he's Muslim—in a system the DOJ found deliberately indifferent to such attacks.
Dmante was sentenced to 70 years after his ex-wife—the alleged victim—publicly stated she accidentally shot herself. The prosecutor intentionally provoked a mistrial, placed a biased witness on the stand, and assigned him an NAACP president as defense counsel who withdrew immediately after conviction.
I'm asking the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles to review and grant relief to both men, and for investigations into the prosecutors and judges involved. These aren't isolated cases—they're a pattern. If this can happen to them, it can happen to any of us. What would you want someone to do if this was your family? If this matters to you, consider signing and sharing the petition.

Citizens for Prison Reform is in Lansing. 3d · Today, lawmakers heard public testimony on HB 5920 and HB 5921, legislation aimed at strengthening oversight and accountability within Michigan’s prison system. We’re sharing testimony from bill sponsor Representative Jen Wortz, who spoke about why these changes to the Office of the Legislative Corrections Ombudsman are needed and why stronger, more transparent oversight matters for incarcerated people, their families, and the public. Citizens for Prison Reform has worked for years alongside families, advocates, lawmakers, and impacted people to help move these reforms forward. Watch Representative Wortz’s testimony below.

Michigan #PrisonReform #Accountability #OmbudsmanBills #Oversight See less

This is a harm reduction strategy to prevent Hepatitis C when inmates often tattoo other inmates using dangerous and reused needles that can cause infections. It will introduce a tattoo training program where inmates can learn how to professionally tattoo and tattoo other inmates like barber shops. It will count as a prison job and be supervised. These skills are transferable when released.

It should meet sanitary requirements and grade sterile needles. No restrictions on tattoos. Any tattoos can be done including hate symbols, gang symbols, religious and political symbols.

This saves taxpayer money because Hepatitis C treatment is extremely expensive and so is a negligence lawsuit.