Technically, it could fly as an argument for (involuntary) manslaughter versus murder, certainly if one replaces “into the crowd” by “over the heads of the crow

Technically, it could fly as an argument for (involuntary) manslaughter versus murder, certainly if one replaces “into the crowd” by “over the heads of the crowd”, or if the crowd isn’t very crowdy, and there’s evidence that the shooter explicitly tried shooting through the crowd without hitting anybody, say as part of an act. The typical “into the crowd” implies that the shooter knew it was almost certain to hit somebody, though, so I don’t think any judge or jury would put much weight into such an argument.