ipl-logo

Do You Think Hammurabi's Laws Were Just Or Not?

524 Words3 Pages

Do you think Hammurabi’s laws were just or not? I’m going to talk about family law, property law, and personal-injury law. The most common punishment was to get your hands cut off. My paragraphs are going to convince you to believe that Hammurabi’s Code was not just. I think that Hammurabi doesn’t need to get into most of your private family life. The first piece of evidence is that if a son strikes his father than he will get his hands will get cut off. I think that’s unfair because that’s in their home and the father can punish his own son for what he did. Secondly, if a father wants to disinherit his son and his son has a “bad” record than he is aloud to disinherit him. I think that’s unfair because than the son will be homeless and maybe become a thief. You would think a father would want to keep his son to work in the fields. The family laws are unjust but the property laws are worst. …show more content…

I can see why they would kill you but I think they should just like put you in jail for like thirty days or depending on what you stole. Also, if you are a creditor and you loan someone money and that person’s crops get destroyed that season than they don’t have to pay you back ever from that time. I think that’s unfair because that’s like if I borrow money from you and I say, “I’ll pay you back in a week,” and then that week comes and I’m like, “Sorry I lost it I can’t pay you back,” then that would be legal. If you think property laws are bad than read the next paragraph about personal-injury

Show More
Related
545 Words | 3 Pages

Was it Just? “Cursed!” is what you'll hear if you decline the written rules of Hammurabi.400 years ago in 1754 Bce. A man named Hammurabi became king of a city called babylonia and made certain rules about family law, property law, and personal injury law and although they were laws, not all laws were fair. To begin with, Hammurabi made a decision to write rules for his land. But were they just?let's answer that.

Read More
588 Words | 3 Pages

Both of the case involves Religion. Based on the R v. Tutton case, even though the accused was following their religion, it does not help the fact that in the end they still committed murder. In this case, although the father was following his own religion, it still does not help the fact that he still physically beaten the child with a

Read More
394 Words | 2 Pages

Hammurabi’s Code covered many issues, including trade, marriage, and divorce. I believe that Hammurabi’s code was fair and just. There many reasons why Hammurabi’s code was fair. For example, Property Law number 21 states: “If a man has broken through the wall [to rob] a house, they shall put him to death and pierce him, or hang him in the hole in the wall which he has made.” This law is fair because if you broke through someone’s wall, they will have to spend lots of time and money to repair it.

Read More
1236 Words | 5 Pages

Hammurabi’s code was erected onto several steles (large pillars of stone) for all his citizens to read and obey. Was Hammurabi’s code just? There are three areas of law where Hammurabi’s code can be shown to be unjust. These are family, property, and personal injury law. Examples of injustice can be found in the area of family law.

Read More
702 Words | 3 Pages

After reading some of the laws I have determined that Hammurabi’s code is in fact just. I will use family,property, and personal injury law to prove it. Here is why I say Hammurabi's family laws are fair. Law 148 states “If a man has married a wife and a disease has seized her, if he is determined to marry a second wife, he shall marry her.

Read More
1138 Words | 5 Pages

The Judgments of Hammurabi are a set of laws that were written by a god. The laws were put in place “to promote the welfare of the people, to cause justice to prevail in the land, and so the strong might not oppress the weak.” The Tale of The Eloquent Peasant, depicts how a peasant has been robbed of his goods and how he eloquently appeals to the king for justice to be served. Both articles discuss; the division of a society’s social class, how gods/kings interpret justice and family relationships within the law. The Judgments of Hammurabi laid out the rules for Mesopotamian citizens.

Read More
403 Words | 2 Pages

Hammurabi’s code is just because of its family law. The family law makes it just because they make it fair for the family to move on after struggles. According to law 195 if a son has struck his own father he shall have his hands cut off so he can 't hit his father anymore. So I think it 's fair because he can 't hit his family members can 't hurt them any more so it 's keeping his family safe.

Read More
755 Words | 4 Pages

Hammurabi claimed that his laws were both just and helpful to a wide range of people, but the majority of the laws don’t support either of his claims. In the instance of many laws, he appears to be very drastic with his consequences. In one of his codes, he says that if a women is caught in adultery with another man, both people must be tied up and thrown into the water (doc C, law 129). The act of binding the two people together and drowning them is a very specific and extreme repercussion for cheating. Another example of Hammurabi’s unnecessary harshness, was the law stating that if a man has broken into another’s house he shall be put to death by piercing him or hanging him in the hole which he made in the house (doc D, law 21).

Read More
775 Words | 4 Pages

This law seems, as well, too harsh. The son should get a punishment but getting your hands cut off for hitting his father would lead to son being scared. In conclusion, Hammurabi 's code is unjust. The evidence shows that the Personal Injury Laws didn’t protect all people equally, the Property Laws punishments were too harsh, and the Family Laws can cause someone 's death.

Read More
701 Words | 3 Pages

King Hammurabi’s codes were unjust because of the evidence found in the 282 laws. The codes that King Hammurabi wrote about were personal injury law, property law and family law. First, there is evidence that the codes were unjust. The first, code was personal injury law.

Read More
875 Words | 4 Pages

Was Hammurabi’s code just? Nearly 4,000 years ago, a man named Hammurabi became king of a city state called babylon. Hammurabi made a very important code in 18th century B.C.E. Hammurabi made 282 laws and he made these codes to protect the weak and poor from the strong. There are areas of law where Hammurabi’s code can be shown to be both, just and unjust. These are Family Law, Property Law, and Personal Injury Law.

Read More
489 Words | 2 Pages

Hammurabi's code and the modern laws have several similarities and differences. For example, they are both intended to maintain order in society. However, Hammurabi’s code is far more violent than modern law. Also, they have different ways of handling things, different punishments, and different social structure. One way that Hammurabi’s Code and the Modern Laws are different is because Hammurabi’s Code is strictly based on social structure.

Read More
675 Words | 3 Pages

These laws should both have the same consequences because all women should be treated equal. These laws on injury show that Hammurabi's code is very unjust. Hammurabi’s code may have been written to protect everyone, but the laws ended up being excessive and harmful. The laws about family, property, and injury are cruelly excessive and are unequal towards different classes.

Read More
874 Words | 4 Pages

With all of Hammurabi’s advancements did he really impact the world today? The Babylonian king Hammurabi, who expanded the city-state of Babylon across the Euphrates River, proclaimed one of the earliest and most complete ancient legal codes B.C. Hammurabi was the sixth king of the First Babylonian Dynasty, reigning from 1792 BC to 1750 BC. His father, Sin-Muballit, who abdicated due to failing health, preceded Hammurabi.

Read More
495 Words | 2 Pages

Laws are always the core of a society and they often indicate a variety of lifestyle decisions made by those people. Hammurabi’s famous set of laws and Moses’ laws could be viewed as two completely distinct documents, yet both set of laws aide historians in revealing insight to the Hebrew and Mesopotamian people. In both societies, enforcing strict consequences that are equivalent to the crime is common. Hammurabi’s well known law states that, “if a man has put out an eye of a free man, they shall put out his eye.” Whereas, in the Hebrew laws, it states, “...if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye...”

Read More

More about Do You Think Hammurabi's Laws Were Just Or Not?

Related Topics

Open Document