to think that some smokers are selfish f****?

[glitzalicious]

so DH and I took my mum (who we rarely see for geographical reasons) and 9-month-old DS for lunch at a pricey restaurant in London today. It was freezing but there were no seats available inside, so at the suggestion of the waitress we sat at a table outside, near a patio heater, and ordered what looked set to be a very nice lunch.
A few minutes after we sat down, a woman in her 50s and her younger male companion came and sat on the table next to us, and both proceeded to light up cigarettes, inches from DS's face (the tables were extremely close together, and he was sitting on my mum's lap, happily eating his lunch). DH very politely asked the man if they would mind not smoking so close to the baby, to which he replied: "It's a free country". His leather-faced companion then gestured to a table at the other end of the al fresco area, with no heater anywhere near, and said: "Nobody's stopping you from moving". DH was quite stunned, and said: 'I think that's quite inconsiderate; it's really bad for the baby", and the bloke said: "I know", before shrugging his shoulders and turning back to his haggard old witch of a friend. I couldn't believe that people could be so selfish; to expect my DS (who had been sitting there before them) to either inhale all of their carcinogens (the fact the guy acknowledged that his habit was harmful to DC was quite shocking) or freeze, just so they could get their nicotine fix. Why the f* did they not move? We did get up and try to cancel our order; it was too late so we had to sit, completely freezing, in the heater-free zone. I have no axe to grind with smokers; if someone chooses to poison their own body it's no one's business but their own. But I would never think that others should suffer just so I could indulge a habit, and if someone were to ask me to stop doing something (talking too loudly in a restaurant etc) I would be so mortified at the prospect of impacting someone's enjoyment of their meal I would stop immediately, as they have just as much right to a nice lunch/dinner out as I do.
People always go on about a 'right to smoke': AIBU to think that right extends only to a smoker's home, or a child-free area? My blood is still boiling over those bastards!

Well, there aren't many places left for smokers to go, and they WERE outside.

I still sit on the fence when it comes to this. It was inconsiderate, however it was not a playground or in school grounds, so as long as it is legal, smokers do have the right to smoke where they want. You had the right to move, which was inconvenient but the law is on their side.

Smoking raises billions for the government each year, less than half of which is used to treat smoking related illnesses on the NHS. No wonder they don't want to ban it. This is what I have an issue with.

Outside is for smokers -you wouldn't want then inside would you?

Eat indoors if you want a smoke free zone.

I am a non smoker but accept that smoking outside is ok.....I can move.

YABU - they were outside, it would have been nice if they were willing to move but I doubt they wanted to freeze away from the heaters either.

As a one off I don't think someone smoking on the table next to you is going to cause much harm. If you sit outside you need to accept that there may be smokers as they aren't allowed inside!

I would have got up and gone, whether the meal was ordered or not. It's bad enough being expected to eat outside in January, but to have the smell of smoke too? No way!

Hilarious.

Sorry but your rights, as breeders, do not trump theirs.

No, they weren't being selfish. They were simply not being altruistic.

Sorry that complete strangers didn't realise that the fact you had a PFB in tow meant you had first dibs on the seats near the patio heater, and, if they wished to pursue a legal activity, which you happen to dislike, they should fuck off to the Alaskan wilds.

yabu ..ffs

Yep you are being unreasonable. You chose to eat outside a packed restaurant. You couldn't eat inside it and they couldn't smoke inside it.

Your baby probably breathes far more harmful things in on a regular basis, so as much as it's still not nice...the odd whiff of cigarette smoke in a wide open space isn't likely to do any long term damage.

I would have smoked there and benn a bit put out to have been asked to move. I would have moved, for the sake of your baby, but not for another adult.

The heater was probably there for the smokers, there are lots of them in London.

You say you were there first, but actually this man was probaly using the restaurant first, and was well within his right to use the smoking facility the restaurant provided.

Serendippy, the law might be on their side, but I have countless 'rights' that I choose not to exercise so as to be considerate of others (still BFing my DS, it is my 'right' to do so anywhere I please, and the law would protect me, but I choose to wear a cover-up when in public so that anyone who has an issue with it won't be offended, even though my belief is that people should BF where and when they please). It's also my 'right' to get steaming drunk and behave like a neanderthal in public; and my 'right' to play my iPod at an ear-shattering level on the Tube; or to eat stinky fast food on a bus, but as a civilised human being I don't think others should have to be suffer for the sake of my own bad habits. Just because something isn't illegal (smoking in a baby's face) doesn't make it OK IMHO

oh, and we did have the right to move, but expecting a baby to sit in the cold, when they could have easily done so themselves (and bothered no one with their smoking as a bonus) is pretty disgusting behaviour

Some non smokers are selfish fuckers too.

They just express it in different ways.

been

get over yourself

Some people are selfish, why presume it is because they are smokers? the fact that they have brown hair or blond hair, does that mean that people with brown/blond hair are selfish? no.

So, yes yabu on that fact alone, regardless of whether their actions where selfish.

Quite how anyone could get near enough to a strangers baby to 'smoke in its face' is beyond me. I expect the wind was blowing in your babyies direction...in which case you could quite easily have moved your baby to prevent it.

OP, listen to yourself....you are coming across as obsessive and controlling.

so, if I chose to bf my son in public without a cover up, am I selfish then? as you say, just because it is legal does not make it ok? it is my right not have someone oggle at me while i breastfeed my son. I shall not sit in a public convenience or cover myself like i am ashamed, because you chose to do so. that is your choice. Like you chose to sit in a smokers area, your choice, not theirs.

YABU. Since the smoking ban, ouside areas are going to have smokers in them.

If you had booked a table then you should be cross with the restaurant for not having a table for you.

If you had booked or not you could have got to another eating place if that one was full. Unless you have been living elsewhere you would know about the indoor smoking ban and the resulting smoking zones outside.

I don't smoke and dislike the smell of it but it is my job to keep myself and my children away from it.

In fairness, the outside is the smoking area. I do agree the couple could have been more polite about it but you were making an unfair demand. If there were no tables available in the non smoking area ie inside then you should have left and gone elsewhere.