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!

Its not using the baby trump card. Its people having manners and bit of decency. Even without a baby, surely most smokers wouldnt sit on a seat right next to anyone eating a meal if there are seats further away?

But you can't just turn around to people and say 'I have a baby, so I'm more important, so everyone accomodate ME'. It's your responsibility to not take your baby into an unhealthy environment and to remove it if you're not happy with what's going on. The smokers were smoking in the smoking area. They couldn't sit inside because smoking wasn't allowed.

harverina, possibly because outside is the only place a person who smokes can enjoy a sit down with a glass of wine and a cig, if there is a patio heater all the better.

If people don't like it they should sit inside, yes even on a hot day!

The've banned it yesterday in Spain in bars, so I've heard and everyone is laughing about it because it will never be enforcable just like it has been revoked in many other countries. I think smokers in the UK have been extremely good about the ban and adhered to it. No wonder people get peed off at being told they should light up OUTdoors.

to be fair harverina I live in london and the only people I see sitting outside in January ARE smokers - it would have to be a bloomin impressive restaurant for me to do so, particularly with my mum and baby in tow, so perhaps they didnt mind as much.

prettyfly1 - I agree with you, the OP should have been aware that smokers would smoke on the patio, but to sit right next to a baby is a bit shit IMO.

yabu - on a lighter note, we were on holiday in Rhodes a few years ago, sitting outside having dinner. I had a cigarette after dinner. A group came and sat next to us. After looking down their noses at me they loudly asked the waiter if they could sit at a "no-smoking" table. Waiter just lifted the ashtray off the table they were sitting at and asked "is there anything else?"

It's also my 'right' to get steaming drunk and behave like a neanderthal in public;

Nope you could be arrests for public order or disturbing the peace.
and my 'right' to play my iPod at an ear-shattering level on the Tube; or to eat stinky fast food on a bus,
Nope again, it's on the terms of carriage that you do not do either of those things.
People do but it's not allowed.
You cannot ask people who are outside not to smoke you simply can't or else they'll tell you where to get off, I thought they were quite polite all things considered I would have laughed at you.

Yes you did CHOOSE to sit outside the restaurant because you could have eaten at another restaurant instead.

To be perfectly frank, I wouldn't be so selfish as to sit my children in the cold...smokey or not just so I could eat at a restaurant of my choice.

I'd sooner nip to the chippy instead of making a big fuss.

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).

You cover up, your choice.

It's also my 'right' to get steaming drunk and behave like a neanderthal in public

No it's not, that's what ASBOs are for

and my 'right' to play my iPod at an ear-shattering level on the Tube

There are also laws about noise levels

or to eat stinky fast food on a bus

Some bus drivers will ask you not to get on with open fast food and they are within their rights to do this

but as a civilised human being I don't think others should have to be suffer for the sake of my own bad habits.

Like the bad habit of knowing you were going to a price London restaurant with only 2 tables in January but not booking a table?

I was quite measured in my original answer but your attitude has really got my back up. Next time book a table inside.

YABU for all the reasons given above. I hate smoking but I know perfectly well that the area outside a pub or restaurant is likely to be very smoky. If there was only a small heated area of course smokers will want to use it.

And YABveryU for implying that all smokers are selfish. I've been surprised at how unselfish some have been recently- a guy moving out of a bus stop on a drizzly and very cold night for instance, when I was the only other person around. I hadn't asked him to move, and wouldn't have done so but I thought it was a very considerate gesture.

harverina, my point exactly. It's not about 'rights' but common decency. They had dozens of other tables to sit at (and weren't having a meal; only coffee), and chose the only table that was wedged between two families who were both eating full meals. If you went to a child-friendly pub or restaurant with friends and wanted to swear etc etc would you not choose a table away from kids, just to be nice? Or would you ruin the other family's night because it was your right to do so? I don't get it.

lal thats awesome - how funny.

But the OP wasnt asking the smokers not to smoke, just not to smoke right next to them.

ahh yes - the commoners who go to a pub that allow children then dare to SWEAR in it. WHAT is the world coming too. Perhaps a pub is not the best place for a child Glitz. Much like the patio of a restaurant in January.

Maybe they sat at the only other warm table near a heater. If there had been other warm tables further away the OP wouldn't be complaining about having to go sit in the cold.

but common decency etc is nothing to do with the person being a smoker or not. Being selfish, or not, is not about being a smoker, it is about the characteristics of the person. Who happens to smoke. It might have been an ultra bloody smelly person, or someone who farted continuously, or swore profanely in front of children, someone who was extraordinarily pissed and rude, but it was another selfish person.

I agree it is not nice to have smoke blown in your face. But it is not nice to presume that the selfishness is due to being a smoker.

So out of interest if your son had started howling, whilst they were having their coffee and fag would you have left so not to spoil there enjoyment ?

glitz - thing is, for you it was about rights.

Most smokers would amble off, and smoke elsewhere, and amble back and eat if there were a baby in the vicinity. And I'll bet there were a few around who were doing just that.

And I'll bet you didn't even notice them, because you think it's your right that they do that, rather than a polite, altruistic gesture.

Thanklessly received, it would seem.

I am willing to bet that your dh asked in an entitled, demand-y sort of way. Which met with refusal. The oddest thing is, most smokers would have shrugged and complied, however rudely the "request" was put. Sadly, you found yourselves next to a couple with as strong a sense of entitlement as your good selves.

*their enjoyment, arghhh

"If you went to a child-friendly pub or restaurant with friends and wanted to swear etc etc would you not choose a table away from kids, just to be nice?"

And if you went to a smoker-friendly eating area and wanted no smoke etc etc would you not choose a table away from smokers, just to be nice?

No, Trillian it sounds like they saw the baby and made a beeline for it, smoke billowing. They had been waiting for an opportunity like this for months... At least the way the OP describes it.

Grizzly, I agree that just because the couple smoke do not make them selfish, but its not the same as having BO or farting next to someone. PAssive smoking has health implications, passive farting does not

Considering how vitriolic and insulting your post is about the woman's appearance (I take it you're a smooth skinned supermodel?) perhaps your attitude rubbed them up the wrong way...and they might have otherwise been very apologetic?