No one is sure if law 87 from Hammurabi'scode is cruel or fair. Laws 66-99 are missing and nobody has ever read them unless they were alive in 1792B.C. I'm sorry i wasn't able to answer your question.
The rules of the law were just.
Mots laws are fair in punishment to the culprit. Once a person becomes a victim, there is not much anyone can do.
282 laws or taxation
Yes, it shows significant gender and stature-related biases. Google Hammurabi's Code if you want a list of the laws.
The Code of Hammurabi is the first written laws.
there were 282 laws made by hammurabi
The rules of the law were just.
they were fair cause they were
Hammurabi realized that cruel kings had a short reign. He put laws in a codified manner.
Hammurabi made a list of about 200 laws. Some were cruel and others were fair. Examples: If a son hits his father his hand shall be cut off. "cruel" If a doctor messes up an operation he shall lose his job. "fair" Hammurabi advanced the cause of justice because, Hammurabi's laws brought the idea that if your bad you will be punished. If your good you will be rewarded.
Hammurabi was known for developing a wise and fair code of law.
His code of laws was fair to all classes of status and slaves.
Hammurabi's laws were cruel because one of his laws was to cut off a son's hands if he hit his father. Another law stated that if you are caught in a robbing a place, you would die. If I was Hammurabi and I made the laws, I would send them to jail. Finally, I would let the accused talk instead of not hearing what they had to say.
They have nothing to do with Hammurabi, whose laws expose themselves as being both cruel and laden with idolatrous beliefs.
Mots laws are fair in punishment to the culprit. Once a person becomes a victim, there is not much anyone can do.
The neighbor cities were commanded by cruel persons and the reigns were short because of this reason. Hammurabi wrote the code and thus his reign were longer.
282 laws or taxation