I'd like to propose an alternative interpretation of Omar's death.

There is no other way for me to read the scene in which Omar passes Kenard pouring lighter fluid onto the cat than as a reference to a book called "The Nature of Morality: An Introduction to Ethics" by a philosopher named Gilbert Harman.

In the first few pages of the book Harman presents nearly the same scene: he asks you to hypothesize that you happen upon a group of youths who are pouring lighter fluid onto a cat and subsequently ignite it (fortunately for the cat the latter did not occur on the episode itself).

Immediately (unless you hate cats) you see that the act is wrong. But why? Harman suggests is that it is probably because somewhere along the line you not only developed an understanding of the relevant facts necessary to understand what is happening (how to see, what a cat is, what pain feels like) but developed a moral theory and superimposed it upon the scene as if it were a fact itself.

What does this have to do with Omar? Well I think that in Omar's final hour the creators are asking us to at least think about the conclusion we could draw about his life as presented by the Wire. From reactions to his death many regard him as a mythic folk hero of sorts; others might emphasize that he capitalizes on the drug culture of Baltimore to feed his own sense of ego. The point I think is that whether you like it or not how you sum up Omar is going to depend on the moral theory you applied to his character over the course of four and three-quarters seasons of the Wire.

So why Kenard? Well, Season 4 of course emphasized the school system and how it affects the children's development. Seeing no place for himself in Baltimore's school system or any other aspect of society Kenard developed his sense of morality on the corner.

As a final thought note that Omar passes the scene of Kenard and the cat completely by. The scene caused him no interest whatsoever. To each their own?

I read Harmon's book 30 years ago in college, and the main thing that stuck with me is the idea that beings like Hitler aren't "immoral." As I recall, Harmon suggests that that's too feeble an idea for what a Hitler is. It isn't that he's merely broken the rules; he's become a monster, like, say, the thing in Cloverfield, who has to be stopped or destroyed no matter what.

I guess Kenard is on his way to this condition.

Wow. Your post made me think of this: Kenard & the kids in the alley about to set the cat on fire are like the kids in the opening montage of The Wild Bunch.

Watch those kids smile with an innocent yet wicked fascination as the ants overtake the scorpion as the Bunch pass by on horseback, and compare it to our 'hero' Omar as he limps past the hoppers on his way to buy a soft pack of Newports. He & his code, like the Bunch and the scorpion, are inevitably, and must necessarily, I think, albeit, in small bits and pieces, be overcome by the young. For good or bad, society calls this progress.