It's exactly like MEM-TEK
Unfortunately, there's only so much that our detectors can do, and the situation that you've painted above, as MEM-TEK
confirmed, does indeed sound like instant-on usage.
There truly is no defense against instant-on usage, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF GOOD TACTICAL DRIVING PRACTICE/TECHNIQUES. Don't be the Rabbit: Not Giving a Free Ride to Others
^ You've *gotta* have a rabbit.
If you're trailblazing by yourself, you either have to alter your speed per the situation (i.e. in your case, when you perceive that you're close enough to the cut-outs/turn-arounds that serve as potential traps, but other things, such as on-ramps, service/emergency pull-offs, blind embankments or overpasses/underpasses, etc. - they ALL demand interactive driver response), or you have to cowboy-up and expect
that you may have to pony-up the cost of a ticket, when you've come out on the other side.
Our tools can only do so much. When the technical limits of the instruments are reached, what you're left with is how you've played the game.
There's only so many ways that enforcement can be achieved, as long as you're willing to tactfully engage such situations, you *should* have the advantage.
And if that means slowing down for a little every mile or so, through a particularly risky stretch, then you've either got to be willing to suffer that - or you've gotta be willing to suffer the consequences.
Let's look at it this way:
You see those painted VASCAR strips on the ground, yet you *choose* to speed through the sectors. Are you guilty? Certainly, for you've engaged in a known-risk activity.
In knowing that our detector's capabilities are very limited, versus instant-on RADAR without the presence of a suitable "rabbit/bird-dog" vehicle preceding, that's a known risk that you're engaging in, in your scenario above, too.