No; considering that the Oxford dictionary defines "menace" as "a person or thing that is likely to cause harm", gambling by itself can't really be a menace to society. If you play one game of chance that has stakes which constitute a small and insignificant amount of money to all the parties involved, then no matter who wins that game, we are probably not going to see any fights break out or anyone getting injured. At sufficiently high stakes, there are professionals who make their living gambling and who pose no threat to any other human being. So the activity of gambling by itself is not a menace to society.
It's when we attach modifiers to the word "gambling" that problems begin to arise. "Gambling addiction", "compulsive gambling", "irresponsible gambling"... these are all activities that require more than just a basic level of engagement by people. A person who has no self-control and engages in compulsive gambling, or has a gambling addiction, and as a consequence of said activity then neglects their family or commits domestic violence, or commits robberies and/or other crimes for financial gain... that person becomes a menace to society, and in this particular case gambling just happened to be the catalyst.
We can make a similar comparison with alcohol, which tends to be tied together with gambling more often than it should. Alcohol can have industrial uses that do not involve consumption by the human body, so alcohol by itself is not a menace to society. But alcoholics, people who have an addiction problem and drink too much [consumer-grade] alcohol, and then subsequently commit other crimes... they are menaces to society. Their catalyst? Obviously, alcohol.
So at the end of the day, it's not the activity (in the case of your question, gambling) that is a menace to society. It's irresponsible people engaging in said activity, and then causing other problems, who end up as menaces to society.