If turning off electronic gadgets is so important, why are there no detectors used to find them?
Three reasons I can think of:


It's easy to detect the general presence of a specific transmitting device (a WiFi antenna, say), but very hard to precisely localize it. They could tell if there's one on the plane, but someone with a very sensitive piece of equipment would have to walk up and down the aisles pointing it at people to actually find it in somebody's pocket. And cellphones (when not in use) are generally burst transmitters: they don't broadcast continuously, they just "ping" the tower every so often. This means it could take a long time and a lot of aisle-pacing.
Many "electronic devices" which are banned are entirely passive and have no traceable[*] emissions. Think cameras, handheld GPS receivers, iPods. (On the other hand this passiveness also means they are extremely unlikely to harmfully interfere with the operation of the airplane, but right or wrong, such devices are still banned in some cases.)
It's not that important. There are a few incidents where electronic interference is suspected as a possible factor, but no conclusive evidence. As soon as there is actually a fatal accident where an electronic device can be conclusively blamed as the cause (and I doubt this will happen), the airlines will be a lot more willing to spend the kind of money that would be required to implement this.


For a full, evidence-based discussion of the actual risks, I refer you to this question on Skeptics Stack Exchange: Are personal electronics a risk to commercial aviation?

[*] No traceable emissions. All electronic devices generate some very, very tiny incidental signals. But these are so weak that they will be virtually impossible to detect on a crowded plane filled with its own (approved) electronics. Such emissions are measured in laboratories with extremely sensitive antennas in special, heavily-shielded rooms under carefully controlled conditions.