hello,
it doesn't sound stupid at all, so don't apologize.
as previously stated, most of our combative traditions were developed before the coming of firearms or judicial systems.
the point... well... the point is just to learn. we are a race of associative thinkers. basically what this means is that we are always trying to "connect the dots" in every situation. in the case of weapon training, we are trying to connect ourselves with people that are gone now. we will never be able to "know what they knew", but we can try to associate certain actions with certain motivations to get an approximate understanding of their experience and contributions to our daily lives.
this is why we learn just about everything that we learn. sure, we change things, we modify things, but the associative aspect is always a part of what we are doing.
if we go a step further, there is always an effort at preserving skills in the event of some change in the world in which conveniences are gone. something like a precautionary effort.
an example might be farming. we have machines and science that make farming very efficient, but we still have future farmers of america that teaches basic farming skills. why? all of the machines and science won't make sense unless you have basic understanding to put it all into proper context. also, should the machines and technology fail, basic skills will have been preserved, ensuring survival of the species.
well, warrior skills are more about killing than survival, but we (humans) are warlike. we like knowing how to kill. mind you, this isn't necessarily because we enjoy killing, but our racial psychology accepts that sometimes, killing is necessary (evidenced by large military forces and police with guns).
the point is, that on some level, swords and spears is just part of who and what humans are. therefore there will always be some segment of the human population interested in examining the skills involved in wielding them, even if only for academic curiosity.
thanks