Here's your references. http://www.referencecenter.com/ref/r...1clk&flv=1
As one who had the pleasure of enforcing martial law in the USA on 3 different occassions (think of all the riots on the East Coast in the mid- to late-60's - I was probably there in green), I can tell you that the local LEOs do not kick back and take the day off, but they stand behind and take orders from the area military commander.
There are federal and state laws from after Katrina that prevent the disarming of citizens following a declared disaster, which is different from a declaration of martial law. Constitutional protections are not out the window when martial law is declared. It takes special executive orders (see Lincolon's shenanigans during 1861 - 1865) to do that, and after it was all said & done the Supreme Court came out of hiding and declaredhis ordersunconstitutional. Lot of good it did folks after the fact, but at least we now have those decisions to rely on if anyone tries that sort of stuff again.
Whether the military decides to disarm some or all in the area depends on just how much has hit the oscillating rotator device and a few other factors. I would doubt there would be anything short of insurrection that would call for wholesale disarmament and searching house by house for firearms - which would probably cause an insurrection if one had not already been afoot.
Good question. Not a fun subject. Not a fun time if it comes to martial law being declared, because that essentially means civilian law enforcement has tanked.
And even when the National Guard is federalized and issued weapons it does not mean martial law has been declared. It takes a separate order that specifies where, when, and under what conditions.