Personally, I don't think it's meant to be ambiguous.
Jimmy had so many of his associates killed that they made a montage out of it.
Henry and Karen became liabilities after the drug bust
.
Given Jimmy's track record, it seems natural he'd have them bumped off, too.
On a side note, according to the Hill children, the scene in question was based on a real event.

Hard to say but I lean more towards a yes.
Send her back there to be whacked with no risk of street witnesses and if he had dresses for her he would have had them with him.
"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

Knock yourself out, Karen.
MAGA! FAFO! Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. Dumbocraps: evil people who celebrate murder.

No it's that I know you. And I should report you, bro.

You mad, Karen?
MAGA! FAFO! Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. Dumbocraps: evil people who celebrate murder.

Jackass.

Yes. He was
definitely
going to have her killed imho. Her intuition, or
"paranoia"
if you wish, saved her life.
MAGA! FAFO! Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. Dumbocraps: evil people who celebrate murder.

You're talking about the scene when he gives Henry some guns and he says, "Stop with those ****ing drugs. They're turning your mind into mush," right?

Henry owed Jimmy money for the crap firearms, and that Volvo 244 GL was very desirable in the early '80s
My password is password

It was obvious that Childs was a Thing at that point cuz he knew what MacGready plan was from the shared knowledge of the two hosts that MacGready told the plan to.

I can understand that. It's like the ending to John Carpenter's The Thing. Some people want it answered, but I love not knowing.
So many stories, so little time.

To some people it doesn't

I agree. It really is just left unknown.
And I feel it works so much better being ambiguous because it just adds to the growing paranoia around all the characters.
So many stories, so little time.

If he really wanted to kill her, he wouldn't have made it that easy to get out. But then again, contrary to what people say about Jimmy and Tommy killing on broad daylight, the context is important. It's 1980, well after the Mafia's heyday. The Mafia's power was crumbling in Brooklyn/New York. Of course Jimmy had to be more stealthy about killing someone.

I've watched that scene so many times and I figured it was supposed to be ambiguous cuz no matter how you analyze it, it's always ambiguous.