Why We Oppose the Planned Execution of Nidal Hasan—and Turning It Into a Public Spectacle
Breaking Free Industries opposes the scheduled execution of Nidal Hasan. We also strongly oppose the announced plan to livestream his death.
The government should not turn an execution into content for public consumption.
Where we stand
Thirteen people were killed at Fort Hood in 2009. Others survived with injuries and trauma. Their families and communities have carried the consequences ever since. Nothing in this statement diminishes those losses, excuses Hasan’s actions, or questions the gravity of his crimes.
We recognize the jury’s verdict and the judicial process that upheld his conviction. We nevertheless oppose his execution. Accountability for even the most terrible crimes must remain consistent with human dignity.
On October 7, the Army announced that Hasan would be executed by firing squad at Fort Hood, Texas, on December 3, 2026, at 1 p.m. Central Standard Time. The Pentagon subsequently confirmed plans to livestream the execution. Although the administration has since indicated that the broadcast remains under consideration, the announcement itself warrants a clear response.
Cancel the livestream. Reconsider the execution.
What the Army’s rules say
Army Regulation 190-55 establishes procedures for military executions. Its provisions describe a controlled event with designated witnesses and expectations for professional conduct.
Paragraph 2-5 identifies authorized witnesses, including military personnel, selected media representatives, the prisoner’s counsel and family when requested, and eligible victims or their representatives. It does not list the general public.
The regulation also excludes witnesses under 18, requires witnesses to receive a briefing on expected behavior, and provides for removing anyone who fails to maintain that decorum. Its public affairs provisions describe news releases, a media advisory, and a media pool—not a public livestream.
These rules raise serious questions about how an unrestricted broadcast would fit within the Army’s existing procedures. The regulation permits exceptions only when consistent with controlling law and regulations. We urge officials not to seek an exception to facilitate a public spectacle.
Whether a particular broadcast would violate applicable law is a matter for legal review. Our objection does not depend on that determination. Something can be legally permitted and still be profoundly wrong.
Why broadcasting a death matters
Taking a life is an irreversible exercise of government power. It demands the greatest restraint and accountability.
Livestreaming an execution invites the world to consume a person’s death as an event. The footage can be clipped, replayed, shared, and stripped of context indefinitely. Children may encounter it. Survivors and victims’ families may find themselves confronted with it without choosing to watch.
We do not presume to speak for those families. Their experiences and wishes deserve respect. They also deserve sustained support, regardless of what happens to the person responsible.
There is a reason why we, as a country, have ceased this practice of public executions. Iran, Taliban-lead Afghanistan, Yeman, North Korea, Somalia, and organizations like ISIS and Al-Qaeda use public executions as a means for deterrence as well as a show of power [of state]. America should never be in the same sentence as those countries when it comes to how we do – well – anything.
There is a meaningful difference between designated witnesses observing a government action for accountability and broadcasting the moment of death to anyone with a screen. Public accountability can be served through independent reporting and scrutiny without making the killing itself a spectacle.
Our opposition to capital punishment includes people convicted of horrific crimes. Our opposition is entirely about how we believe our society should act, not as a remedy for the crimes committed.
What we are asking for
We call on the administration and military leadership to:
- Cancel the announced livestream and reject any public broadcast of the execution.
- Uphold the safeguards in Army Regulation 190-55 rather than weaken them to accommodate a broadcast.
- Halt the execution and commute Hasan’s death sentence to a sentence of imprisonment.
We encourage business leaders and others who share these concerns to speak up. A commitment to a fair and humane justice system must extend to the moments when that commitment is hardest to uphold.
About BFI and BizVsDP
Breaking Free Industries is a custom apparel company in Orange County, California, providing screen printing, embroidery, and related services. We are a second-chance employer: we hire people with conviction histories. Our work is grounded in the belief that people deserve dignity, meaningful employment, and an opportunity to build a future.
Our co-founder, Josh Nowack, has also signed the Business Leaders Against the Death Penalty Declaration. He joins the nearly 600 executives from around the world who have declared a commitment to using their voices to abolish the death penalty and advocate for a fairer, safer world.
This statement reflects the views of Breaking Free Industries and its co-founder Josh Nowack.
Josh Nowack
Co-founder, Breaking Free Industries
Sources
- U.S. Army: Execution date announcement, October 7, 2026
- Reuters: Pentagon announces plans to livestream the execution
- Axios: President expresses doubts about livestreaming, October 12, 2026
- Army Regulation 190-55: Procedures for Military Executions
- Business Leaders Against the Death Penalty Declaration
