You both make analogies with regard to cars and cigarettes and that's not a bad thing to do but there are differences.
One difference is that vehicles are essential for the modern economy and needs to be protected in a way that drug use does not not.
What does that have to do with the damage to others you are causing? Who gave you the right to injure innocent people, because you're too lazy to be inconvienced?
You're far more selfish than any smoker.
People can choose not to frequent a particular restaurant.
They can't get away from your toxic fumes, unless they stay inside all day.
"Dr. Sletten describes health impacts from gasoline vehicles, including reduction in lung function and lung tissue damage, exacerbation of lung disease including asthma and emphysema, and various forms of cancer. Air pollution particularly impacts the elderly, infants and children, and those already suffering from lung disease."
"What does that have to do with the damage to others you are causing?"
We put up with costs when they are essential the modern economy. If we did away with cars and trucks a lot more than 20,000 people would die from the resulting economic crisis.
Drilling oil is another example. It's messy, polluting and disrupts wild life. But any right minded person is in favor on continuing oil production and expanding carefully because the alternatives are worse.
Nictotine consumption, on the other hand can be continued without the harm that comes from smoking cigarettes next to people who don't want it.