Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
# What Is "Three Simple Laws"? It's a Scam
Many people regard it as a classic story of Liu Bang winning the hearts of the people, but in reality, it's more like political propaganda. In the *Discourse on Salt and Iron*, there's a passage that says: "The laws of Qin were more numerous than autumn weeds, and their restrictions were as dense as congealed fat." This means that the Qin dynasty had extremely numerous legal codes with excessively detailed regulations—like an extremely fine mesh net where ordinary people could easily violate the law with the slightest carelessness. So when Liu Bang entered Guanzhong, he told the elders and influential figures of various counties: "The elders have long suffered from the harsh laws of Qin." He was saying that everyone had been tormented for a long time by Qin's severe legal system. Thus he announced that from then on, they would no longer use so many complicated laws, but instead adopt "three simple laws": those who kill shall die; those who injure others or steal shall be punished accordingly.
In other words, he kept only three most basic legal principles. According to historical records, when the people of Qin heard this news, they were delighted and sent cattle, sheep, and food to Liu Bang's army. This created a classic narrative: Liu Bang abolished harsh and severe punishments and thereby won the people's hearts, and "he who wins the people's hearts wins the world." However, the problem is: could this actually be sustained long-term? The fundamental purpose of ancient legislation was not to protect the people, but to manage and control them. The more numerous and detailed the legal codes, and the more refined the regulations, the stronger the emperor's control over society. The reason Qin had such numerous and strict laws was essentially to strengthen its rule.
If the laws truly were reduced to just three chapters—only addressing murder, injury, and theft—then ordinary people's freedom would become very expansive. For example, publicly mocking the emperor, disturbing order, resisting officials and other such behaviors would not necessarily violate the law. Clearly, such a system would be unacceptable to imperial authority. Therefore, "three simple laws" could not possibly persist long-term. According to the *Book of Han*, it wasn't long before Liu Bang himself felt that "three chapters were insufficient to prevent crime," so he ordered Xiao He to reformulate the laws, which became the "Nine Chapters of Law." The original three quickly expanded to nine.
But the story didn't stop there. The *Book of Han*, Section on Criminal Law, records that the Han legal system subsequently continued to expand. By the era of Emperor Wu of Han, to what extent had laws developed? The statutes and ordinances totaled 359 chapters, with 409 death penalty provisions and tens of thousands of various case precedents. These legal documents filled bookshelves and storage rooms to such an extent that even officials specifically responsible for managing the statutes could scarcely read through them all. So people constantly emphasize "Liu Bang's three simple laws won the people's hearts to win the world." This claim may not be entirely wrong, because historical records do document that the people of Qin "were all greatly pleased."
But the problem is that "three simple laws" was never truly implemented long-term. In a sense, it was more like a political tactic—using simple, lenient promises to win people's hearts, while the actual legal system quickly reverted to a complex and rigorous structure. In other words, perhaps the people's hearts were genuinely won, but the method of winning them may not have been entirely authentic.